Here’s what’s been going in our part of the QR code world over the past 3 months. The following data is based on the QR codes created by QRStuff.com users during January, February and March 2014.
Who Was Scanning QR Codes?
On a world-wide basis the location of QR code scan events hasn’t really changed all that much for us over the past 12 months. USA, UK, Australia and Canada are still in the top 5 however Malaysia has now moved up and pushed Germany down to #6.
We recorded scans from 216 countries during the quarter with Morocco, Kazakhstan, Ghana and Bolivia showing solid increases at the back of the field, and first-time scan events recorded from Equatorial Guinea and South Sudan.
For the USA the top 10 is still basically the same as last quarter however Virginia has continued its steady move up through the ranks over the past few quarters. Florida and Illinois are showing signs of softening but this hasn’t affected their rankings. Hawaii and Alaska aren’t shown on the map but came in at #40 (0.36%) and #44 (0.22%) respectively.
The top 10 for Europe remains essentially unchanged, and Europe continues to account for approximately 25% of the global scan events recorded.
What Were They Scanning Them With?
iPhones are still the most popular devices used for scanning QR codes. Over the past 12 months we’ve seen Windows devices move into double digits (they only accounted for 2-3% of scans in Q1 2012) with this growth principally at the expense of iOS devices and Blackberrys. Scans recorded from Android devices have increased globally over the past 2 years (up from 31% in Q1 2012) but have fallen away by 2% in the USA.
On a global basis the split for iOS devices was 39.4% iPhone and 10.1% iPad.
What QR Codes Were Being Scanned?
We keep an eye on two metrics – QR codes created and QR codes scanned – and it’s fairly safe to expect that the relative values for a given data type should be pretty much the same.
Following this logic through, if the relative number of scans recorded for a particular QR code data type is significantly greater than the relative number of those QR codes created, then it would indicate a greater number of scans per QR code, meaning that that particular data type is perhaps more effective in engaging than other data types. The reverse would also apply – if the relative scans are less than the relative rate of creation, then that data type could be considered to be less effective.
Obviously there’s a fairly significant flaw in that assumption – placement (contact details QR codes on business cards will get always get less scans than website URL QR codes in magazines) – however major disparities between the two relative figures that can’t be otherwise explained definitely give a strong hint as to which data types are more effective than others.
Our App Store Download data type is a case in point – while only representing 2.4% of the QR codes created by our users, they account for a whopping 20.9% of total scan events recorded. This data type is definitely punching above its weight in terms of its ability to engage with users and attract scans.