2015 Gang of Five: Apple Pay vs. Android Pay vs. Samsung Pay vs. Paypal “pay”?

The Gang of Five — Apple, Google, Amazon, PayPal-eBay, and Facebook — is uniquely suited to dominate mobile wallets in the mobile-social tech cycle. Over the past three years, the Gang of Five has moved up strongly in consumer perceptions of trust and privacy, while the top five financial institutions, top four payment networks, and top three wireless carriers have either declined or remained steady. The Javelin TIP model analyzes brands against consumer perceptions of trust, innovation, and privacy to identify the top contenders for mobile payments supremacy. This annual review examines Apple Pay vs. Google Wallet on Android Pay vs. PayPal vs. Samsung Pay and other mobile wallet capabilities and offerings and distinguishes winners from losers. The report also analyzes Facebook’s newly announced payment offering based on Messenger. Long- and short-term implications are assessed, identifying how relative adjustments may affect future competitive positioning and how financial institutions and networks can best compete.

Primary Questions:

• How do the strengths and weaknesses of the Gang of Five play against one another and those of major FIs, payment networks, and wireless carriers?
• How well do consumers trust the Gang of Five compared with the major FIs, payment networks, and wireless carrier brands when it comes to their financial information?
• Which brands are viewed as most innovative?
• How do consumers rate the Gang of Five against the major FIs, payment networks, and wireless carrier brands when it comes to protecting their private information?
• How have these perceptions changed over time — and what do these changes foretell for the existing financial services players?
• What new mobile wallet models are being developed?
• How should brands position themselves to compete in mobile wallets?

Companies Mentioned: Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google, PayPal, Samsung

• A random‐sample panel of 3,200 consumers in November 2014. 
• A random‐sample panel of 3,100 consumers in August/September 2014. 
• A random‐sample panel of 3,225 consumers in June/July 2014. 
• A random‐sample panel of 5,641 consumers in January 2013. 
• A random‐sample panel of 5,878 consumers in December 2011.