Sobering Revenue Stats of 70K Mobile Apps Show Why Devs Beg For Subscriptions

Most mobile apps fail to reach $1,000 in monthly revenue within their first two years, according to a new report from RevenueCat examining data from over 75,000 mobile apps. Across all categories, only about 20% of apps achieve the $1,000 threshold, while just 5% reach $10,000 monthly.

In 2025, the top 5% of apps generate 500 times more revenue than the remaining 95% -- up from 200 times in 2024. After one year, elite performers in gaming, photo and video, health and fitness, and social categories exceed $5,000 monthly, while those in the 25th percentile earn a meager $5-20 per month. The report also highlights North American developers' heavy iOS dependence, with 76.1% making over 80% of their revenue from Apple's platform. Subscription retention presents another challenge, with barely 10% of monthly subscribers staying beyond the first year.

Just because you put in a lot of effort

[ebunga]

Doesn't mean you will win the jackpot. Success isn't guaranteed. It sucks, but that is life.

Re:Just because you put in a lot of effort

[evil_aaronm]

Yep. And I accepted that before I started developing. But some people have no concept of "reasonableness." I put a lot of time and effort into an iOS app - not a game; a time management utility - and settled on 0.99, the smallest amount you could charge. It wasn't a category shaking app, but if you liked what you saw, and it helped make your day a little more efficient, 0.99 isn't going to break your bank. I got a review back saying, "This shouldn't cost 0.99." Fk me. We should all work for free, evidently. I think I made ~ $7 total for that app. C'est la vie.

On the other hand, my most popular app was a 15-minute throwaway jobbie for playing Hot Potato. I gave that one away for free because it was a joke app. My kid made the graphic of a potato, and it looked more like a hilarious turd. I made the "buzzer" sound myself, with just a voice recording of me saying, "Ehhh ehhh." And people loved it! Go figure.

Re: Just because you put in a lot of effort

[Z00L00K]

I made a small app to calculate some values that I offered for free, but then Google wanted too much access into my economics and I didn't want that so now that app is a zombie. I can't remove it from the store and close the developer account because there are people that have it installed.

So it's a trap situation.

Re:

[Mandrel]

Could you explain "Google wanted too much access into my economics".

Re: Just because you put in a lot of effort

[RegistrationIsDumb83]

Google demands you upload your driver's license to them, then they publish your home address on the app page for all to see. It's actually pretty bad safety issue for smaller creators.

Re:

[Mandrel]

OK, thanks.

I recently encountered this myself as a Chrome extension developer. They wanted photo ID, and a public support phone number (which I solved with a cheap SIM). I think the published address only applies to companies, but I'm not sure. Google's docs imply everyone, but I've read about an individual dev exception.

EU again.

Re:

[Z00L00K]

Full view of my bank account was one of the expectations they had, covertly written.

Re:

[Mandrel]

Thanks. That's not nice.

Perhaps this is due to the new EU law that allows use of alternate payment processors. For example, Apple no longer forces app developers to use ApplePay with its 30% commission. But use of an alternative has a commission of 27%, which Apple can only enforce by having access to all incoming payments.

Re:

[Tony Isaac]

One thing I learned from a friend who made his Kickstarter campaign work: He didn't just throw it out there, he hired a marketing company. My own Kickstarter campaign, went nowhere. I didn't hire a marketing company.

Your experience, and mine, reinforce the idea that to make money, you've got to spend money.

Re: Just because you put in a lot of effort

[RegistrationIsDumb83]

100% true. All of business basically just comes down to if your cost of user acquisition is less than the revenue per user. Every product I worked on that flopped didn't die because of technical reasons, but marketing ones. Not every product can be advertised cheaply enough to make the business model work.

Re: Just because you put in a lot of effort

[greytree]

I wrote some useful apps because I enjoy programming.

I didn't market them because I donâ€(TM)t enjoy marketing.

One thing really pisses me off:
If you search the Play Store for the name of my app, it is about the 10th result, after many apps with different names, so is basically impossible to find even by name.

I get about one sale per annum.

Re:

[antdude]

Is that Hot Potato Timer app?

Re:

[evil_aaronm]

Yeah. What gave it away - the hilarious potato turd? :-D He keeps telling me I need to do an update, with a next-gen potato, but I have plenty of other tasks in the queue.

Re:

[antdude]

I find it amusing with its low ratings. Let him take over the app. /s ;)

Re:

[Ecuador]

I had a very weird situation with going for a low price, in that people did not appreciate it? I got an equatorial mount and the existing polar alignment apps were not good, so I built my own. I released it as I figured people should have it and continued working on it. When I saw it became popular, I thought why not make some pocket money and added a "Pro" version with more features and set it at 1.99. It sold quite a few units per month considering it's a niche app. Not to be modest but it was by far the

Good.

[Rendus]

Most apps don't need to exist anyway. It's sort of like FOSS in that respect honestly: 70 iterations of the exact same concept, all half-baked don't all need to exist and clog up package maintainer time and effort. Or clog up app stores and confound searches for an app that actually functions.

Re: Good.

[50000BTU_barbecue]

But I need to run all 70 apps on multi-core AI GPUs in Docker VMs in the cloud! This is vitally important.

Re:

[PsychoSlashDot]

Most apps don't need to exist anyway.

I agree. This is telling us that 15,000 apps are bringing in $1,000+/mo. I'm shocked that there are more than maybe 200. What the hell are these things?

Re:

[Shakes Fist]

I have apps that I've paid for and I've used them for years. They do exactly what I want, so why would I even look for a replacement??

Sounds like...

[sit1963nz]

ANY other business. They go from small owner operator businesses up to billionaire status.
I HAVE the Apps I want, I don't need any more. Last IOS App I bought was probably 3 years ago.

Re:

[alvinrod]

Or any domain for that matter. A lot of people play basketball, but a relatively small percentage will get a college scholarship to play much less be able to earn a living from playing after college. It's basically the Pareto principle rearing its head all over again.

Re:

[postbigbang]

And 10% of books subsidize the printing/distribution of the other 90%.

In other news, the center of the bell curve uplifts the rest. News at 11, see it on Reddit in 3,2,1.

Re:

[Archangel Michael]

I bought an App, years ago. I would buy it again, but it is gone..

I didn't need it. It was just a cool display and tracked my mileage when I was on a trip. "speedometer" I'm sure there are others, but this one was one I liked.

Gone.

UH huh

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

Subscription retention presents another challenge, with barely 10% of monthly subscribers staying beyond the first year

That's because when a month goes by and I don't use the app I have just thrown money in the trash can.

I have some advice for Apple- If you want me to do anything at all besides make a fart noise when an app wants a subscription then I suggest you set up the App store such that if I do not use that app during the billing period I don't have to pay. If that's a bridge too far, then too fucking bad. I ain't paying for nothing.

Re:

[thegarbz]

Worse still are subscription apps that lock standard core functionality behind the paywall. Weefine did that recently for their diving gear. Previously their diving cases lacked RAW photography support which is critical for underwater photography. So they finally released a new app which supports RAW ... if you pay a monthly subscription.

I'm not sure how many people they converted, but I opted to give a different company money instead.

If it's good, I'll pay you once.

[nightflameauto]

I'm willing to pay quite a bit for a good app once. Or once per release cycle. Scrivener gets my money for a desktop and a mobile version when they put out an update, because it's good. And sometimes I'll even spring for a second desktop license for my backup system, so I can open projects without having to boot up the laptop. Good app = don't mind paying.

I have yet to find *ANY* app, or full-blown desktop program, that is worth any monthly fee, no matter how small. I'm just not at all interested in getting sucked into the, "Even if I have no use for it or forget I have it, I'm still paying this month," game. It may make sense for business uses, but I just can't see it being worth it as an individual.

Re:

[JaredOfEuropa]

The problem is: you're one of the few ones. As it turns out, people don't hesitate to spend $1000 on a new phone, maybe $100 for an extended warranty... but they agonize over the decision whether or not to spend a few bucks on an app. Even 99 cents (not even half a latte macchiato) present a huge barrier to purchase.

This cartoon [theoatmeal.com].

Re: If it's good, I'll pay you once.

[ArmoredDragon]

Unless it's an apple phone, then at least once you paid for the phone, it's yours and you get to keep it as long as you want; even after it's out of support you can still flash custom firmware and use it for whatever.

My experience with paying for apps on the other hand is usually one of these:
- I got a practical use out of it maybe twice, went to use it again much later but forced OS upgrades broke compatibility one day after the developer stopped maintaining it, and unlike with a PC OS, you can't just run

Re:

[war4peace]

It is very likely that I will be nailed on the cross for writing this, but I have an MS Office yearly subscription.
The projects I work on require it, and I make way more than I spend. It makes sense to spend $70 a year and make $3K a month using it.
As far as mobile apps go, there's Spotify, which I use consistently, YouTube Premium and Tasker. There was a mobile game which I used to drop $5 on, once in a blue moon, for a monthly pass, but the developer ensittified it a few months ago and I stopped spending.

Re:

[sarren1901]

So as nightflameauto mentions, it's worth a subscription for a business but not an individual that may not even use the app every month. If you are clearing $3,000 a month and having MS office available is part of generating that revenue, then it's a worth while investment.

The only time I've ever used a subscription was when I was using a test preparation application. I think I paid maybe $18 across a month for it but I did pass my several hundred dollar cert exam. I would consider that a worthy investment.

Re: If it's good, I'll pay you once.

[JJJJust]

How about more than once? I have a GPS status app that I bought a pro license for at a price of $1.55 USD. That was in 2016. I still have the app, the app is still being developed and my pro license is still valid. A license is about $7 now. My Nova Launcher Prime license from 2016, still valid. MediaMonkey Pro, 2015. Still unlocks all the extra features. MediaMonkey desktop has progressed a few versions and I would have get a new license to upgrade. But not so with the Android app, even though it too i

Re:

[nightflameauto]

How about more than once? I have a GPS status app that I bought a pro license for at a price of $1.55 USD. That was in 2016. I still have the app, the app is still being developed and my pro license is still valid. A license is about $7 now. My Nova Launcher Prime license from 2016, still valid. MediaMonkey Pro, 2015. Still unlocks all the extra features. MediaMonkey desktop has progressed a few versions and I would have get a new license to upgrade. But not so with the Android app, even though it too is still being developed. I would not pay for any of these apps as a monthly subscription or even as a yearly subscription (I don't even use any of them really). But if the developers released a new version and said I had to upgrade my license to continue having unlocked features, I would not object. I don't even see how I *could*. Unlike with Cerberus, I don't recall any of these apps promising me a lifetime of unlocked features. It's been 10 (or nearly 10) years, I've gotten more than my money's worth.

Yup. Plenty of long-term apps I've purchased new licenses for at upgrade time. If they're good and the demo of the new version is still good, I'm all in. If the "Upgrade" is just shoveling AI at me? I don't buy the new license. I've had a few that lost me as a user permanently over that nonsense lately.

Automatic capitalism

[xack]

In an AI generated world, automatically generated money is the future. Just wait until rentals gets renamed as home subscriptions.

Re:

[hwstar]

You will own nothing, and you will (be made to) like it

Flood the market ...

[gweihir]

... have prices drop to the bottom. It is not hard to understand. In addition, most of these apps are crap made by people that tried to get rich quick. Just another deranged hype that finally comes to an end.

ROI?

[TJHook3r]

I'd be interested to know what the cost of the lower end apps actually is. Presumably similar to the costs of publishing one of the hundreds of thousands of books that get churned out per year, or the equivalent in paintings that appear on Etsy every second. I regard most apps like art, sure a few might score big bucks but most are just a hobby

most are crap

[drinkypoo]

Most apps are crap and the stores are shit with terrible search, so you can't find the non-crap apps. Google at least clearly allows devs to buy advertising that puts their shit above what I was actually searching for. I haven't spent much time in Apple's app store (the iPhone is a work device so I'm not installing shit on it) so I don't know how similar that might be.

I am absolutely, positively never paying a subscription for an app unless I absolutely need it to work, and even then only in the worst condi

What's certain in this world

[OrangeTide]

Is that the App store owners are making more money than the App makers.

meh

[ChunderDownunder]

I've never bought an app.

Most I get from f-droid. The rest are 'free'.

Stop gimping your mobile website and the only services that would prevent me from switching to mobile Linux would be the security theatre of 2FA.

News at 11

[anoncoward69]

Those 80% of apps that don't get at least 1k a month in income are probably retarded apps like "flashlight" apps when every modern smart phone has the ability to use it's camera flash as a flashlight from toggles in the OS itself.

Re:

[Random361]

Oh, but this flashlight app is the absolute brightest! We didn't set all the brightness to 255, we set it to 65535! Yeah!

Welcome to the Entertainment Business!

[cliffjumper222]

This is true for almost all entertainment, which apps kind of fall into mostly. Music, acting, film, games, Youtube, TikTok, etc., etc. for the vast majority of creators, there is no money in it *at all* from the actual creative part. There is money if (a) you become famous (b) you make money through some other means, like subscriptions, (c) you invest a whole load of money and use connections to float your product to the top, e.g., advertising, pay for reviews, radio play, commercials, etc. etc.

This last one is basically how music has been productized and sold for decades. Virtually anyone can play an instrument, and although writing a catchy song/tune is harder, it is quite possible. What transforms someone into a successful pop star is 95% the record company. This is why a lot of producers end up broke even thoguh they sold millions of copies. Why are geriatric bands still touring?

Life in the entertainment business is exemplified by huge disparities and luck. It is unfortunately, a commodity fighting for the core limited resource - people's time.

Sturgeon's Law

[devslash0]

"90% of everything is crap". The app statistics seem to back it up.

Just because you create an app that does something, doesn't mean it provides any actual value to anyone and is worth paying for. Most of the apps are just same copy-pasted concepts. Rip-offs hoping to make any money at all. Let them die peacefully.

Is anyone remotely surprised?

[JDLazarus]

I used to have a 3rd party alarm clock app I used because Apple doesn't support one feature I need in their built in alarms function. I bought the app for $5 years ago and held onto it because it worked well until only 64bit apps were allowed, which broke it. New version from the same dev is a monthly fee for $5.50/month. The patch notes for every update from the last year are "localization updates". There have been no notable changes to the interface or functionality of the app since the version I bought y

Free apps

[parker9]

Why is no one mentioning the Apple tax: 30% take on anything (which you can get down to 15% if you jump through numerous hoops with Apple) and $99/year developer fee? The later so you can have the privilege of submitting an app for review and, assuming it doesn't get rejected, Apple will host it for you while burying it the App Store so it's impossible to find.

I write apps because there is an itch to scratch. All of them are free (and source hosted on GitHub). One, ironically the most popular, was rejected

99%

[allo]

99% of all apps are crap. And the amount of money an app makes does not depend on developer time, but on marketing, app quality and how large the competition is. Try to sell your fancy text editor. I use the free one that is practical instead of fancy but starts faster, doesn't crash and doesn't cost a cent.