Skip to main contentArrow Right

Table of Contents

Signing up and logging in are often a user’s first interaction with your brand. Well-designed authentication flows validate credentials while establishing trust and setting the tone for the entire user experience. Ultimately, effective login UI design can mean the difference between converting a new customer and losing them to friction. 

This guide aims to equip you with insights and best practices for seamless, user-friendly login page design. You’ll learn how to increase successful signup and login rates, decrease drop-offs, and boost conversions just by following a few simple design principles. 

Let’s start by exploring some basic but indispensable building blocks for better login UI design.

Understanding authentication design principles

Humans have innate preferences about how things should look and work, which is why the fundamentals of good design apply just as much to login screens as they do to other disciplines. The use of space, color, and thoughtful placement can create both great art and accessible login interfaces. 

This is the key design question in login page design: “Is this clear at face value? If I were a first-time user, would I be confused or confident?” Ultimately, if something feels off about your authentication UI, you’re probably right.

Good authentication design balances simplicity with security. Clean layouts with minimal input fields help users complete authentication quickly and easily. Visual hierarchy guides them naturally through each step, while consistent styling builds trust and reinforces your brand. Smart, contextual feedback shows users exactly where they are in the process and what they need to do next.

Let’s take a closer look at the core themes of great login UI design, including login page examples for reference.

Keep the layout simple

Simple layouts reduce friction—meaning they don’t disrupt the natural flow—and help users complete signup or login quickly. What does a simple layout entail? Clear containers for information, minimal input fields, and straightforward instructions. When screens are cluttered with too many choices, users enter “analysis paralysis” and become more likely to abandon login. 

Looking at the examples below, you can see how cluttered layouts with scattered social buttons and redundant text create unnecessary barriers and confusion.

Common mistakes include: 

  • Lengthy, bloated text instructions at the top of the login interface

  • A long list of social providers (Google, Apple, Facebook, Slack, Microsoft) that overwhelms users with choices

  • An unnecessarily all-caps “OR USE A DIFFERENT METHOD” divider

  • A “Sign in” button inconsistent in size versus the other elements

Side-by-side comparison of login page designs labeled Problematic on the left with a red X icon and Optimized on the right with a green checkmark icon. The Problematic example shows a Welcome heading followed by the text We are excited to have you with us. Please choose a method to authenticate with. Below that, it states By signing in, I agree to the company's Privacy statement and Terms of service with the links underlined. The form then displays five stacked social login buttons reading Sign in with Google, Sign in with Apple, Sign in with Facebook, Sign in with Slack, and Sign in with Microsoft, each with their respective brand icons. A divider reads OR USE A DIFFERENT METHOD in all caps. Below is an Email label with an Email input field and a small blue Sign in button. The Optimized example shows a cleaner Welcome heading with the text By signing in, I agree to the company's Privacy statement and Terms of service. Only two social options appear: Sign in with Google and Sign in with Apple in outlined buttons. A simple Or divider separates these from an Email input field and a full-width blue Sign in button that matches the container width. The optimized version eliminates the verbose welcome text, reduces social provider options from five to two, removes the all-caps divider, and uses consistent button sizing.
Fig: Login page examples; left is problematic, and right is optimized.

The optimized version shows how thoughtful organization makes a difference:

  • Two popular social login methods (Google and Apple, with the most commonly used on top), though up to three options is acceptable

  • A clear visual break between social and email options

  • Simple, focused input fields 

Descope Tip: Create streamlined layouts using Descope Styles. You can customize the placement of each component for a simpler, more accessible look. 

Use clear visual hierarchy

Good visual hierarchy guides users naturally and logically through the flow, reducing hesitation and abandonment. When all the elements are tough to distinguish from each other, it makes finding the right action or path much more difficult, meaning more drop-offs and frustration. 

Look at the login screen examples below, and we can see how proper button styling and layout placement make a difference.

The problematic version shows:

  • Same-sized, similar-colored buttons for every action

  • No clear distinction between primary and secondary choices

  • Poor use of space and alignment

Side-by-side comparison of login page designs labeled Problematic on the left with a red X icon and Optimized on the right with a green checkmark icon. Both examples show a Welcome heading followed by the text By signing in, I agree to the company's Privacy policy and Terms of service with the links styled in blue. The Problematic version displays three equally weighted filled buttons stacked vertically: a blue Sign in with Passkeys button with a person icon, a blue Sign in with SSO button with a key icon, and a purple Use a different method button, all the same width and visual prominence. The Optimized version establishes clear visual hierarchy with a filled blue Sign in with Passkeys button as the primary action, an outlined Sign in with SSO button as the secondary option, and Use a different method rendered as a simple blue text link rather than a button. The optimized design reduces visual noise by differentiating primary, secondary, and tertiary actions through button styling rather than presenting all options with equal weight.
Fig: More login page examples; problematic version is left, and optimized is right

The optimized version demonstrates better hierarchy:

  • Primary “sign in” button is prominent and distinctly colored

  • Secondary actions use less prominent styling

  • Clear spacing between different action types

  • Logical placement of buttons where users expect them

Descope Tip: Use the style designer to make buttons distinct for primary and secondary actions. You can adjust colors, sizes, and spacing while previewing how everything works together.

Think beyond a single screen

Planning for multiple scenarios means considering every step in the authentication journey. That includes errors, successful verification, confirmation screens, and everything in between. If your login flow calls for multiple states, screens, and transitions, prioritize making these segues subtle and familiar (rather than jarring and confusing). 

Looking at the login screen examples below, we can see the vast difference between narrow and comprehensive approaches.

The problematic example shows:

  • Generic error messages with no clear connection to the issue

  • No guidance on how to fix the problem

  • Sudden page changes that can disorient users

Comparison of login flow designs with a Problematic example above marked by a red X icon and an Optimized example below marked by a green checkmark icon. The Problematic flow shows two screens: a Welcome screen with the text By signing in, I agree to the company's Privacy statement and Terms of service, an Email input field, a blue Sign in button, an Or divider, and an outlined Sign in with Passkeys button. An arrow points to the second screen which displays only 403 Error with no additional context or guidance. The Optimized flow shows four screens progressing left to right. The first screen matches the problematic welcome screen with Welcome heading, By signing in, I agree to the company's Privacy statement and Terms of service, Email input field, blue Sign in button, Or divider, and outlined Sign in with Passkeys button. An arrow points to the second screen showing an envelope icon with the message We've sent a verification link to {{example@email.com}} and instruction text Click the link in the email to continue, a loading spinner, a blue Send again button, and a Choose another authentication method link. An arrow points to the third screen displaying a green checkmark icon in a speech bubble with the message You're authenticated, you can close this window now. The word Or appears between the third and fourth screens, with the fourth screen showing a red prohibited icon, the text 403, the explanation Forbidden. Access to this service is denied, and a Contact us link. The optimized version provides clear feedback at each step and helpful error messaging with a recovery path rather than a dead-end error screen.
Fig: Login UI design examples, with problematic versions above and optimized ones below

The optimized examples offer better visibility and account for more scenarios:

  • Specific errors and error codes connected to affected fields

  • Clear suggestions for fixing issues (e.g., not a valid email address)

  • Smooth transitions between states with loading animations

  • Obvious navigation options for users who need to go back or retry

Descope Tip: We’ve thought through all the common authentication scenarios and mapped them into logical flows. You can use these plug-and-play templates as a starting point, knowing they cover the full range of use cases.

Maintain consistency

Brand consistency in authentication flows is about more than just looking good. While there’s nothing wrong with wanting to keep your themes, colors, and logos front and center, consistency builds trust and reinforces your identity at every step. When users see familiar elements throughout their journey, they feel more confident about sharing their information.

Looking at the examples, we can see how inconsistent design elements can undermine user trust.

The problematic version shows:

  • Mismatching colors between screens

  • Inconsistent button styles throughout the flow

  • Different fonts and text sizes

  • No cohesive visual language

Comparison of login flow designs with a Problematic example above marked by a red X icon and an Optimized example below marked by a green checkmark icon. Both flows show three screens progressing left to right through the same authentication steps but with different typography and styling choices. The Problematic flow begins with a Welcome screen containing By signing in, I agree to the company's Privacy statement and Terms of service with links in blue, an Email label with Email input field, a blue Sign in button, an Or divider, and an outlined Sign in with Google button with the Google logo. The second screen shows We've sent a code in a monospace or typewriter-style font with Enter it below as instruction text, a Code label with six empty input boxes for the verification code, and a Send again link styled with a border box around it. The third screen displays a green checkmark icon in a speech bubble, YOU'RE ALL SET in all caps, and You can close this window below. The Optimized flow shows the same Welcome screen with identical elements: By signing in, I agree to the company's Privacy statement and Terms of service, Email input field, blue Sign in button, Or divider, and Sign in with Google button. The second screen displays We've sent a code in clean sans-serif font matching the rest of the interface, Enter it below instruction, Code label with six input boxes, and Send again as a simple blue text link without a border. The third screen shows the same green checkmark icon in a speech bubble, You're all set! in sentence case with an exclamation point, and You can close this window. The optimized version maintains consistent typography throughout, uses sentence case instead of all caps for the success message, and styles the Send again option as a standard link rather than a bordered button.
Fig: Login UI design examples, with problematic versions above and optimized ones below

The optimized version maintains a unified experience:

  • Consistent colors aligned with brand themes

  • Uniform button styling across all screens

  • Matching typography and spacing

  • Clear visual identity from start to finish

Descope Tip: Maintain consistency by applying your brand elements (colors, fonts, buttons styles) automatically across your entire authentication flow. Even if your brand goes through updates, Styles makes it simple to apply those changes to all your user-facing screens.

Use visual feedback wisely

Clear visual feedback helps users understand where they are in the authentication process and what they need to do next. Think of this as a subtle set of road signs that nudge the user in the right direction without disrupting the natural flow. This reduces confusion and uncertainty while building confidence in your platform.

Most importantly, if a user reaches out to support, it equips them with more information to help resolve the issue. Looking at the login screen examples, we can see how different feedback styles affect the user experience.

The problematic version shows:

  • No field highlights to show user focus

  • No indication that submission is processing

  • Sudden page changes without warning

  • No visual cues for validation

The optimized version showcases better feedback:

  • Active fields clearly highlighted 

  • Processing states show progress or gradual changes

  • Validation checkmarks confirm completed steps

  • Clear response to every user action

Descope Tip: Many components in Descope include built-in states for loading, validation, focus, and more. “On Blur” error presentation shows immediate feedback when detecting an invalid entry, and “On Submission" displays error text when a user tries to submit something incorrectly.

Conclusion

Great login UI design ensures users benefit from a secure auth environment without sacrificing usability. Each principle we’ve covered, from simple layouts to smarter feedback, helps create login flows that make users feel safe while confidently moving them forward. When implemented thoughtfully, these login page design choices lead to higher completion rates, less abandonment, and more conversions.

While these concepts might seem straightforward, consistency is key. Together with design fundamentals like accessible fonts, colors, and responsiveness, the login page examples we’ve shown as a reference. In other words, don’t be afraid to adjust based on your specific user needs.

Descope Styles provide a complete authentication design suite elegantly integrated with our drag & drop Flows. These visual interfaces combine to give you unparalleled control over login UI design and authentication flows. Start with our pre-built templates and style presets to begin, then A/B test different flows to see which approach works best for your user base.

Ready to begin your login page design journey? Sign up for a Free Forever Descope Account now, and use our plug-and-play building blocks to launch your first login interface within minutes.