For most subscription apps, paid acquisition pays back faster on iOS. RevenueCat's 2026 data puts median download-to-paid conversion at 2.6% on the App Store against 0.9% on Google Play, and median revenue per install at day 60 at $0.42 against $0.16. But the gap sits almost entirely at the top of the funnel. Once a user starts a trial, iOS and Android convert at the same rate, and a paying Android subscriber is worth only about 8% less after a year. Google Play also takes a smaller fee in a subscriber's first year. So Android pays back as well as iOS only when its installs are cheaper by more than its conversion gap, which on median figures means an Android install costing less than roughly 39% of an iOS one.
Our piece on iOS vs Android CPI covers the cost side: why iOS installs cost more and why the gap is structural. This guide covers the value side and puts the two together. It sets out the store-level benchmarks, the three places the published report contradicts itself, a break-even ratio you can calculate for your own app, and how fees, billing failures and attribution change the answer.
Key takeaways
- iOS installs are about 2.9 times as likely to produce a paid subscription within 35 days, and the iOS lead holds in every category RevenueCat publishes.
- The payer gap closes; the install gap does not. Trial-to-paid is at parity and year-one value per payer is about 8% apart, but per install iOS stays roughly three times ahead.
- Google Play keeps about a fifth more of each UK pound in year one at Apple's standard rate. That narrows the break-even ratio from about 3.1x to about 2.6x, and Apple's Small Business Program takes the advantage away again.
- Google Play loses twice the share of cancellations to billing failures. That is revenue lost after acquisition, and it is fixable.
- Never compare platforms on Ads Manager ROAS. Android is measured sooner and more completely than iOS, so judge both on store-level cohort revenue.
iOS vs Android subscription benchmarks in 2026
Every figure below comes from RevenueCat's State of Subscription Apps 2026, which covers more than 115,000 apps and more than $16 billion in revenue. They are medians across apps, and each row has its own denominator and window, so read across a row rather than down a column. The iOS first-renewal figures for monthly and annual plans are derived from the stated Google Play figure and the stated gap, because the report does not print them directly.
| Metric | Definition | App Store | Google Play | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Download-to-paid | Share of installs with a paid subscription within 35 days, median | 2.6% | 0.9% | About 2.9x iOS |
| Trial-to-paid | Share of trial starts that convert to paid, median | 32.6% | 32.5% | Parity |
| Revenue per install, day 60 | Total revenue divided by total installs, 60 days after install, median | $0.42 | $0.16 | About 2.6x iOS |
| Realised LTV per payer, year one | Realised revenue per paying user after one year, median | $23.38 | $21.62 | About 8% iOS |
| Billing errors | Share of subscription cancellations caused by billing failures | 15.2% | 32.2% | About 2x Google Play |
| First renewal, monthly plans | Share of monthly subscriptions renewing at the first cycle | About 54% | 57.6% | Google Play +3.5pt |
| First renewal, annual plans | Share of annual subscriptions renewing at the first cycle | About 41% | 49.0% | Google Play +7.6pt |
Two more store differences matter for planning. Revenue is heavily concentrated on iOS: in every region, 66% to 75% of apps make more than 80% of their revenue from the App Store, with North America the most concentrated at 75.1%. And by the third renewal the stores look the same, with weekly and monthly plans converging at about 78% to 81% and annual plans at about 64%. Long-term retention is not a platform question.
Adapty's State of In-App Subscriptions 2026 points the same way with a different method. It reports averages rather than medians, and finds iOS converts installs to paid about three times better than Android, 3.6 times on annual plans, while Android weekly-plan lifetime value is only 18% below iOS. Different datasets, different statistics, same shape: the platforms differ in how many users pay, far more than in what a payer is worth.
Three contradictions in the report, and which figures we use
RevenueCat's Apple versus Google summary does not match its own charts in three places, and the summary versions are the ones being repeated around the web.
- Download-to-paid. The summary says 2.9% against 2.6%. The chart says 2.6% against 0.9%, roughly 2.9 times. We use the chart, for the reasons set out in our download-to-paid benchmarks.
- Revenue per install at day 60. The summary says $0.42 against $0.23, a 1.8 times gap. The store-and-geography chart says $0.42 against $0.16, 2.6 times, and the report's own payer-value section refers back to "the ~2.6× gap seen at D60". We use the chart.
- Billing errors. The headline insight says 31% of Google Play cancellations are billing failures against 14% on the App Store. The cancellation chart says 32.2% against 15.2%. The direction and the roughly two times gap are the same, so either supports the argument. We quote the chart.
Trial-to-paid has a smaller wobble: the key takeaway says 32.6% on the App Store and the benchmark line beneath it says 32.0%. Either way it is parity with Google Play's 32.5%.
The payer gap closes, the install gap does not
RevenueCat's own reading is that monetisation differences between the stores "narrow materially over time", because year-one value per payer is only about 8% apart against a 2.6 times gap in day-60 revenue per install. That is true per payer. It is not true per install, and an advertiser buys installs.
A rough way to see it is to multiply each store's payer rate by its payer value. This is an approximation, not a benchmark, because the product of two medians is not the median of the products, and the 35-day conversion window is shorter than the year of value. But it shows the order of magnitude:
Google Play: 0.9% × $21.62 ≈ $0.19 per install
Ratio ≈ 3.1x
Per install, the iOS advantage after a year looks no smaller than at day 60. The convergence happens among people who have already paid, which is what the trial-to-paid parity tells you as well. Android users who reach the paywall and start a trial behave like iOS users. Far fewer of them get there.
That moves the Android question out of the ad account. If Android trial-to-paid matches iOS but install-to-paid is a third of it, the problem is somewhere between the store page and the trial start: onboarding, how the paywall renders on Android devices, which offers are shown, or simply a less committed audience. RevenueCat's data even shows Google Play level with or ahead of iOS on trial-to-paid in Education and Travel, where Travel sits at 53.0% on Google Play against 39.7% on iOS. Our install-to-trial benchmarks are the place to diagnose that step.
How store fees change the comparison
RevenueCat's product documentation says its realised lifetime value charts are calculated before store commission and tax, and the report does not say its payer values are netted, so we treat them as gross. The stores' different fees then have to be applied before the numbers mean anything for acquisition. Apple's subscription terms pay 70% of the price, minus taxes, during a subscriber's first year and 85% after a year of paid service, and free trials do not count towards that year. Members of the App Store Small Business Program receive 85% from the start. Google Play's fee schedule charges auto-renewing subscriptions a 10% service fee plus a 5% billing fee where Google Play Billing is used, so 15% from the first payment.
On a UK price that includes 20% VAT, that leaves about 58% of a first-year App Store payment at the standard rate and about 71% of a Google Play payment, the netting we set out in full in our guide to break-even CPI for subscription apps. Android keeps about 21% more of each pound in year one. That is a real advantage, but it is worth about a fifth, against a conversion gap of nearly three times.
Worked example: how much cheaper must an Android install be?
This example is hypothetical. It uses RevenueCat's medians as inputs and UK netting, and it is meant to show the method rather than to give you a target. The question it answers is how many times more you can pay for an iOS install than an Android install and still get the same year-one value back.
| Scenario | Year-one value per iOS install | Year-one value per Android install | Break-even CPI ratio |
|---|---|---|---|
| Before any store fees or tax | $0.61 | $0.19 | 3.1x |
| UK prices incl. VAT, Apple standard rate (70% first year) | $0.35 | $0.14 | 2.6x |
| UK prices incl. VAT, Apple Small Business Program (85%) | $0.43 | $0.14 | 3.1x |
At Apple's standard rate the ratio is about 2.6 times. So if an iOS install costs £3.00, an Android install has to come in below about £1.17 to return the same value in year one. For a developer in the Small Business Program the ratio goes back to about 3.1 times, and the Android install would need to cost below about £0.96.
Now set that against the cost side. Our CPI comparison puts the usual iOS premium at two to five times for consumer apps. A 2.6 times break-even ratio sits inside that band, which means neither platform wins by default. An app paying twice as much for iOS installs should probably be buying more iOS; one paying four times as much may well be better off on Android. The median app is close to the line, and your app is not the median app.
To run it with your own numbers:
If iOS CPI ÷ Android CPI is below the ratio, iOS is the better buy. If it is above, Android is.
Take the conversion and payer value from your own store cohorts, not from Ads Manager, and use the same window for both stores. If you already know your target CAC, the same ratio tells you each store's allowable CPI directly.
Where does paid acquisition pay back faster: timing, cash and billing
The break-even ratio answers whether a platform pays back. Three store differences change how quickly.
Revenue arrives earlier on iOS
Most of the iOS advantage is already visible by day 60, and Google Play leads on first renewals for monthly plans (57.6%, 3.5 points ahead) and annual plans (49.0%, 7.6 points ahead), while iOS leads on weekly plans. In plain terms, iOS front-loads its value and Android catches up a little through renewals. If you judge on an early window such as day 7 ROAS, Android will look slightly worse than it ends up, so give its cohorts the same full window before deciding. Our ROAS benchmarks explain how to read those windows.
Cash arrives earlier on Google Play
Apple pays within 45 days of the end of the fiscal month in which a transaction happened. Google Play pays out around the 15th of the following month. For a business funding growth from revenue, a Google Play pound reaches the bank a few weeks sooner, which matters for the cash side of CAC payback even though it changes nothing about the value of a cohort.
Google Play loses more subscribers to failed payments
On the App Store, 82.9% of cancellations are voluntary unsubscribes and 15.2% are billing errors. On Google Play the split is 66.3% and 32.2%. RevenueCat's summary is blunt: the primary platform difference is billing reliability, not unsubscribe behaviour. Every Android subscriber lost to a declined card makes the Android install that produced them look less valuable than it was. Before concluding that Android traffic is poor, check that your app handles Google Play's grace period and account hold properly and that lapsed payers are prompted to fix their payment method. It is one of the few acquisition levers that sits entirely outside the ad account.
Why Meta shows the platforms differently
The two platforms are not measured the same way, so their numbers in Ads Manager are not comparable. On Android, Google Play's Install Referrer API returns the referral details and timestamps for each install, so installs can be matched back to the ad that drove them. On iOS, results from users who have not agreed to tracking arrive through Apple's postbacks, which are aggregated and delayed. Apple's conversion window documentation sets windows ending on days 2, 7 and 35, each sent after a random delay, so the last postback for an install can arrive around day 41.
The practical effect is that early iOS results in Ads Manager are incomplete and early Android results are not. A side-by-side read on day 3 will flatter Android every time. We explain the delay in detail in our guide to SKAdNetwork postback delays. For platform decisions, use cohort revenue by store from your subscription data, such as RevenueCat, and treat Ads Manager as the tool for comparing ads within a platform rather than platforms with each other.
Geography changes the answer more than platform does
A lot of what looks like a platform difference is a market difference. RevenueCat's day-60 revenue per install is $0.65 on iOS and $0.26 on Android in North America, against $0.15 and $0.04 in India and South East Asia. Prices are identical across stores in North America at the median ($6.99 weekly, $9.99 monthly, $39.99 yearly) but diverge elsewhere: the median Google Play annual plan in India and South East Asia is $14.64, and in the Middle East and Africa the median annual plan is $27.22 on the App Store against $18.85 on Google Play.
Western Europe is the interesting exception. There, the median year-one value per payer is $27.08 on Google Play and $26.47 on iOS, so an Android payer is worth slightly more. In that market the entire platform decision comes down to conversion and CPI. And India, South East Asia and Latin America have the highest share of Android-leaning apps, at about 17%, which is where Android is often the only realistic source of volume.
When to put Meta budget behind Android
There is no universal platform split. These are the patterns we use to decide where the next test goes.
| Situation | What it usually means | What to do |
|---|---|---|
| North American audience, most revenue already on iOS | iOS is almost certainly the better marginal pound. RevenueCat finds North America is the most iOS-concentrated region. | Scale iOS first. Test Android only when iOS costs per trial start to climb with spend. |
| Western European audience with strong payer value | Payers are worth the same on both stores here, so the whole question is conversion. | Test Android on a trial or purchase event and judge it on the break-even ratio, not CPI. |
| India, South East Asia or Latin America | These regions have the highest share of Android-leaning apps and much lower prices, especially on Google Play annual plans. | Android may be the volume. Price locally and judge each market as its own business. |
| Android trial-to-paid at or above iOS, but install-to-paid far below | Android users who reach the trial are fine. The leak is between install and trial. | Fix Android onboarding, paywall rendering and offers before buying more Android traffic. |
| High share of Android cancellations from failed payments | Revenue is being lost after acquisition, which makes every Android install look worse than it is. | Turn on payment recovery before judging Android's paid economics. |
Whichever way the split goes, run each platform as its own campaign with its own budget and its own benchmarks, optimise both towards a trial or purchase event rather than installs where you have the volume, and review the break-even ratio monthly. It moves whenever your paywall, your price or your market mix moves.
How we approach the platform split
In the accounts we run, the platform question nearly always starts from the same place: someone has seen a cheap Android CPI and wants to move budget. Our first step is to rebuild the comparison on store cohorts and the break-even ratio above, because the answer is different for a hard-paywall app in the US and a freemium app with a large European audience. None of our published case studies split results by store, so we do not quote client figures here. Our Meta Ads service pairs the campaign management with the creative, which matters on Android in particular, where the leak is usually in the first session and the ad has to set up what onboarding delivers.
If your app is already spending on both stores and you want the split rebuilt on cohort economics, see how we work with consumer and subscription apps and check our pricing. For where platform choice sits in the wider plan, start with our subscription app marketing strategy guide.
Frequently asked questions
Do iOS users convert better than Android users in subscription apps?
At the install stage, yes. RevenueCat's State of Subscription Apps 2026 puts median download-to-paid conversion within 35 days at 2.6% on the App Store against 0.9% on Google Play, and finds no category where Google Play is ahead at the median. Once a user starts a trial the gap almost disappears: median trial-to-paid is 32.6% on the App Store and 32.5% on Google Play.
Is an Android subscriber worth less than an iOS subscriber?
Only slightly. RevenueCat's median realised lifetime value per payer after one year is $23.38 on the App Store and $21.62 on Google Play, about 8% apart, and in Western Europe the Google Play median is slightly higher. The big difference is how many installs become payers, not what a payer is worth.
Should a subscription app run Meta ads to Android at all?
Often yes, but on a different test. Android pays back as well as iOS only when its cost per install is lower than iOS by more than its conversion gap, after store fees. With RevenueCat's medians and UK netting that break-even ratio is about 2.6 times, so an Android install needs to cost less than roughly 39% of an iOS install. Calculate the ratio from your own store cohorts before deciding.
Does Google Play's lower fee make Android more profitable?
It narrows the gap but rarely closes it. On a UK price including VAT, a developer keeps about 58% of a first-year App Store subscription payment at Apple's standard rate and about 71% on Google Play, so Android keeps around a fifth more of each pound. Apple's Small Business Program, which pays 85% from the first payment, removes that advantage for smaller developers.
Why does Android ROAS look better in Meta Ads Manager than in RevenueCat?
Usually because the two platforms are measured differently. Android installs can be matched through the Google Play Install Referrer, while iOS results from users who have not consented to tracking arrive through Apple's delayed, aggregated postbacks, the last of which can land around day 41 after install. Early iOS numbers in Ads Manager are incomplete, so compare platforms on store-level cohort revenue instead.
The short version
iOS turns installs into payers about three times as often as Google Play, while payers themselves are worth nearly the same on both stores. Google Play's lower first-year fee narrows that gap by about a fifth, and its higher billing failure rate quietly widens it again. On median figures an Android install needs to cost less than about 39% of an iOS install to pay back as well, which is close enough to the real CPI gap that the decision has to be made on your own store cohorts. Judge both platforms on revenue by store over the same window, never on early ROAS in Ads Manager.