Infinite Scroll vs Pagination

The argument is usually framed as flow versus friction, but the real question is whether anyone comes back. Pagination gives every result an address: page 3 can be linked, bookmarked and reopened, and the back button behaves. Infinite scroll trades all of that for uninterrupted browsing — and takes the footer with it, which is the complaint users actually voice. Neither is wrong; they suit opposite kinds of list. A feed nobody revisits wants scroll. A list of invoices someone works through wants pages.

If a user will want to find one item again, paginate. If the value is only in what comes next, scroll.

Infinite Scroll

A list that loads additional items automatically as the user approaches the end, rather than splitting them into pages.

Reach for it when

The content is a browsing feed with no natural end — a timeline, a photo grid, a discovery surface.
Nobody needs to return to item 240. The value is in what is next, not in what was.
There is nothing below the list. If the page ends with the feed, nothing gets buried.
The primary context is mobile, where scrolling is cheaper than tapping small page numbers.

Avoid it when

There is a footer. It becomes practically unreachable, and people do go looking for terms, contact links and settings.
The user will want to come back to a specific item. Without page URLs, returning means scrolling from the start.
The list is search results or working data — anything where “where was I” is a real question.
The set is large and each item is heavy. Memory grows without limit unless you virtualise, and the page degrades the longer someone stays.

Pagination

Navigation that splits a list into numbered pages, showing one at a time and letting the user jump between them.

Reach for it when

The user may need to come back to a specific result — search results, orders, invoices, tickets.
The list has a known size and knowing “12 of 340” is useful information rather than trivia.
There is something below the list that must stay reachable: a footer, related links, a summary.
The data is being worked through rather than browsed — a queue someone processes in order.

Avoid it when

The content is an open-ended feed with no meaningful end. Page numbers on a timeline are meaningless.
The list is short enough to show at once. Two pages of four items each is worse than eight items.
The user is browsing casually and position does not matter — the click between pages is friction with no payoff.