The idea sounds obvious: build an app, get shoppers to install it, let them collect points, send them offers and bring them back to the brand.
The problem is that an install is not loyalty. Registration is not engagement. And technology, by itself, is not a reason to return.
The short version: a dedicated loyalty app makes sense only when a brand has a large enough reachable customer base, sufficiently frequent purchase occasions, an ongoing value proposition, a budget for acquisition and retention, and the operational capacity to keep the program useful. When those conditions are missing, a retailer program, wallet-based solution, partner ecosystem or multibrand platform may be the more rational choice.
An app is not the same thing as a loyalty program
A loyalty program is a business system. An app is only one possible interface for that system.
The program still has to define:
- which behaviour it is trying to change;
- what value the member receives;
- how that value is earned and redeemed;
- how the economics work;
- which data is collected and why;
- how that data improves future decisions and offers;
- how behavioural change and business impact will be measured.
An app can make identification, progress tracking, personalisation and reward redemption easier. But if the underlying program logic is weak, the app simply becomes a more expensive way to deliver a weak proposition.
Why do companies want their own app?
There are legitimate reasons:
- a direct relationship with shoppers;
- first-party data;
- less dependence on retailers and external platforms;
- personalised offers;
- better visibility into purchases and reward use;
- more frequent communication;
- the ability to connect several products or brands within one company.
There is also a less comfortable reason. A proprietary app can look like visible proof of digital transformation. It is much harder to prove that shoppers will still open it after the novelty of the first download disappears.
High enrolment can hide weak engagement
Deloitte's 2025 Consumer Loyalty Program Survey found that the average US respondent was enrolled in eight loyalty programs but actively participated in only five. At an industry level, 51% engaged with just one program.
Those figures come from the United States and should not be copied directly onto Serbia or other markets. But the underlying problem travels well: enrolling is easy; earning sustained attention is much harder.
Deloitte also found that 40% of respondents sometimes forget to redeem rewards. A program can have members, points and a technically sound app while the value exchange is still too weak or too complicated to stay relevant.
Seven conditions for a dedicated loyalty app
1. A sufficiently large and reachable customer base
An app carries fixed costs: development, integrations, maintenance, security, support, analytics and ongoing content. The smaller the active user base, the harder those costs are to justify.
High sales volume alone is not enough. The brand needs a realistic way to identify, attract and activate enough shoppers without relying indefinitely on paid media just to get people back into the app.
2. Enough purchase frequency
If the product is bought only a few times a year, expecting shoppers to regularly open a single-brand app is a difficult proposition.
High purchase frequency does not guarantee success, but it creates more natural moments for earning value, seeing progress and returning. With infrequent purchases, the program needs other compelling reasons to remain useful between transactions.
3. A clear, ongoing value exchange
The shopper gives the brand data, attention and time. In return, the program has to provide value that is easy to understand and genuinely desirable.
That value does not have to be limited to discounts. Deloitte's 2025 survey found that 72% of respondents said their preferred loyalty program made them more likely to spend with that brand, while 56% said the program increased their spending.
There is an important caveat: those questions referred to each respondent's preferred program. Weaker programs should not be expected to produce the same effect.
4. A reason to open the app again
A points balance is not always enough.
- clear progress towards something valuable;
- frequent and relevant benefits;
- easy reward redemption;
- personalised offers;
- content with standalone value;
- challenges and gamified mechanics;
- multiple categories or partners within one ecosystem.
If the app becomes relevant only when the brand sends another push notification about a discount, it has not yet built enough value of its own.
5. A budget for acquisition and retention
The cost does not stop when development ends.
- acquisition and installs;
- onboarding;
- driving the first meaningful action;
- reactivating inactive members;
- rewards and benefits;
- customer support;
- analytics and experimentation;
- security, privacy and compliance.
A brand that can afford to build an app but cannot afford to keep it relevant probably cannot afford the actual loyalty program.
6. Operational capacity for offers, content and support
A loyalty program is a living operation. Someone has to design mechanics, negotiate benefits, investigate abuse, resolve support issues, analyse performance and continuously improve what is not working.
Deloitte's global 2024 Consumer Loyalty Survey found that 86% of respondents rated financial rewards and simplicity as important or very important, while four in five valued flexibility in how rewards are earned and redeemed.
Making a program feel simple to the shopper usually requires disciplined operations behind the scenes.
7. The ability to turn data into better decisions
First-party data is not valuable merely because it exists.
- which segments to activate;
- which products to connect;
- which offers to send;
- how communication frequency should change;
- how inactivity will be identified;
- how incremental purchase behaviour will be measured;
- how customer privacy will be protected.
If the data ends up on a dashboard that nobody uses, the app has created cost and risk rather than competitive advantage.
When does a dedicated app make sense?
A proprietary app is easiest to justify when the business has a broad portfolio, frequent transactions, a large customer base, a meaningful loyalty budget and the ability to deliver fresh value on a continuous basis.
That is why the model is often more natural for businesses such as retailers, large QSR networks, telecom operators, banks and airlines. An FMCG company can also be a strong candidate when its portfolio is broad enough and it has a reliable way to recognise customer purchases.
A single product bought occasionally has a much harder job.
When can another model be better?
Wallet-based or lightweight digital access
Useful when the main need is easy identification, coupons or benefits without asking the shopper to install and repeatedly open another standalone app.
Retailer loyalty program
A rational option when the retailer already has a large active user base, basket-level data and high usage frequency. The brand gains access to an existing ecosystem but gives up some control over the customer relationship and data.
Partner ecosystem
Several complementary partners can create more occasions in which members earn or use value. The trade-off is greater complexity around economics, data ownership and responsibilities.
Multibrand platform
This can make sense when one brand does not generate enough purchase frequency or enough standalone value to give shoppers a regular reason to return. Several non-competing products can create a broader shared value proposition.
Project Codes uses that multibrand logic. Shoppers can earn Project Codes diamonds by purchasing participating products from different non-competing FMCG brands, then redeem those diamonds for available in-game codes in the local marketplace. Each additional participating brand can create more relevant opportunities to earn value.
That does not mean a multibrand model is always superior. A brand gives up some exclusive control over the overall experience. The right model depends on the commercial objective, purchase frequency, target audience, budget and desired level of ownership.
Measure the program, not just the app
Download volume is an implementation metric. It is not proof of business value.
- registration rate after install;
- percentage of members who reach the first meaningful value moment;
- monthly active members;
- purchase frequency versus a relevant control group;
- time to first and subsequent purchases;
- reward redemption rate;
- cost per active member;
- share of inactive members;
- incremental revenue and margin;
- the relationship between member value delivered and program cost.
A good program does not merely collect members. It changes behaviour enough to justify its cost and complexity.
Make the loyalty decision before the technology decision
Before writing a brief for an app, write the brief for the loyalty logic.
Which behaviour are we trying to change? Why should a shopper come back? How often can they earn meaningful value? What does one active member cost us? Who will operate the program after launch? What is the simpler alternative?
If those questions do not have credible answers, app development should not be the next step.
Frequently asked questions
Does every loyalty program need an app?
No. A program can use a card, phone number, email address, digital wallet, web account, retailer system or partner platform. The interface should follow the business logic, not the other way around.
Does a loyalty program have to use points?
No. It can use direct benefits, status, cashback, challenges, digital value, access to content or a combination of several mechanics.
Does a high number of app installs mean the program works?
No. You need to understand active membership, earning and redemption, changes in purchase behaviour, incrementality and the ongoing cost of sustaining activity.
When does a multibrand model have an advantage?
When a single brand does not have enough purchase frequency or enough standalone value to create a regular reason to return. Several complementary or non-competing brands can increase the number of relevant earning occasions.