Runa reported on May 20 that 99.4% of rewards delivered through its platform were redeemed within 30 days. The company used that figure to argue that the process after a recipient clicks to claim deserves as much attention as the gift card catalogue itself. [S01]

The metric is a company claim with an important measurement boundary: Runa’s article does not identify the observation period, number of rewards or a precise definition of redemption. It therefore cannot be treated as a measure of how much gift card value recipients subsequently spent in stores.

Why the claim matters commercially

Runa began with digital gift card infrastructure in 2016 and has expanded into other payout types. [S02] Completion of a reward claim is a meaningful point in that business because it connects a funded programme to the person receiving value.

An employer or loyalty platform can choose a reward supplier partly for that connection. A broad catalogue has limited practical value if recipients cannot access the reward. Conversely, a smooth claim process does not make an unsuitable reward useful.

The May article promotes Runa Reward Cards through the same API used for gift cards. It presents a short link-and-terms journey as an alternative to requesting bank details for a small, occasional payout. It also acknowledges that recurring or high-value payments may justify more extensive information collection. [S01]

Those are different payout use cases, not evidence that bank transfers are inherently inferior. Required checks depend on the product and situation, and simplifying a form cannot establish compliance by itself.

Claimed, delivered and spent are separate events

Runa’s cancellation support page makes the distinction concrete: a claimed payout cannot be cancelled once the recipient has received the details needed to redeem with a merchant. Eligible unclaimed payouts can be cancelled, with value credited to the sender’s balance the following month. [S03]

Claiming therefore has an operational and funding consequence before the final purchase necessarily occurs. The sender may see a completed distribution while the recipient still holds a merchant code to use later.

The company’s gift card support also places validity and expiry information on the gift link, subject to brand terms. [S04] That creates another reason to avoid reading a claim rate as a complete account of recipient value.

For a programme operator, the financial questions are distinct: how much was committed, how much was claimed, what was returned and what information exists about final usage. Combining those stages into one percentage can hide where unfinished activity actually remains.

A useful benchmark needs a denominator

The 99.4% figure may be useful as a starting point for a supplier conversation, but its explanatory power depends on the missing methodological detail. An aggregate combining reward types could also behave differently from one specific employee or loyalty programme.

Runa benefits commercially if high completion makes its infrastructure more attractive to existing and prospective clients. The evidence published in May supports reporting the claimed result and its proposed mechanism. It does not isolate which design change caused that result or establish the same outcome for every buyer.