RevenueCat vs StoreKit 2 (kendi altyapın) Comparison

Rent multi-store subscription infrastructure as an SDK + backend

VS
StoreKit 2 (kendi altyapın)

Apple's first-party framework, but you write the server side yourself

16 min readServices

Quick Verdict

The threshold is clear: below $2,500 in monthly tracked revenue (MTR), RevenueCat is practically free — what you're comparing there isn't 1%, it's zero cost, and your own stack is always more expensive next to that. For a single-product, GDPR-sensitive app selling only on the App Store, plain StoreKit 2 is defensible. If you're multi-store, keeping RTDN's 18 notification types in sync with App Store V2 notifications gets expensive; as a rough rule of thumb, reweigh the decision once MTR passes $50,000+.

RevenueCatStoreKit 2 (kendi altyapın)
Read the full verdict

Score Comparison

Loading chart...

Detailed Scoring

Detailed Scoring: RevenueCat and StoreKit 2 (kendi altyapın) — category-by-category scores out of 10
CategoryRevenueCatStoreKit 2 (kendi altyapın)
Performance
8/10
8/10
Ease of Learning
8/10
5/10
Ecosystem
8/10
6/10
Community
6/10
5/10
Job Market
5/10
6/10
Future-Proof
8/10
8/10

Pros & Cons

RevenueCat

Pros

  • Fully free up to $2,500 in monthly tracked revenue (MTR), only 1% above that
  • One entitlement model for App Store + Google Play + Amazon + Stripe + web
  • SDKs are MIT-licensed and open source, data is exportable via REST API v2
  • Webhooks auto-retry 5 times with increasing delay (5-80 min)
  • Dashboard comes with ready-made MRR, Revenue, Active/New Customers metrics
  • Official migration plan consulting can be requested (custom plan with the RevenueCat team)
  • Paywall, A/B testing, and web-to-app funnel tools (Growth Tools) come built in
  • iOS SDK 5.91.0 (Sep 23, 2026) and Android SDK 10.23.0 (Sep 24, 2026) — weekly release cadence

Cons

  • Above $2,500 MTR, revenue from every store flows through a third-party 'processor' (requires a GDPR/data-transfer assessment)
  • Your business logic (entitlement/offering model) becomes tied to RevenueCat's abstraction
  • Paywall and A/B test data is collected by the same third-party 'processor' as purchase data
  • The purchases-android repo has a smaller community than purchases-ios (560 vs 3,070 stars)
  • Can add unnecessary abstraction for a simple, single-product, single-platform app

Best For

Subscription products sold simultaneously on App Store + Play + webEarly-stage apps with monthly tracked revenue below $2,500Small teams that want to set up paywall A/B testing and cohort/LTV analysis quicklyTeams that don't want to hand-write refund/reinstatement and subscription status syncProducts that want a single entitlement source across multiple platforms (iOS+Android+web)

StoreKit 2 (kendi altyapın)

Pros

  • No SDK fee — comes bundled with the Apple OS, zero extra license cost
  • Revenue/user data never flows to any third party, no extra 'processor' involved
  • AppTransaction and receipts are cryptographically signed by the App Store
  • No vendor lock-in — the architecture is entirely yours, no dependency on RevenueCat
  • The App Store Server API can back-fill a 180-day (30-day in sandbox) notification history
  • First-class support on Apple's own platform, documented through WWDC sessions

Cons

  • Covers only the Apple ecosystem; the Play side needs a completely separate integration (RTDN + Billing Library)
  • You must verify JWS-signed responses on your own server and write the retry/backoff logic yourself
  • App Store Server Notifications V1 is deprecated, the V2 endpoint is mandatory on your server
  • Play Billing Library updates frequently (8.3.0 and 9.1.0 major API additions, 9.0.0 behavior changes) — ongoing maintenance load
  • Tools like paywall A/B testing and a cohort/LTV dashboard must be built from scratch
  • Collapsing Play RTDN's 18 numbered (1-22) subscription notification types into a single model alongside App Store V2 notifications is a separate engineering effort

Best For

Single-platform (App Store only), simple single-product subscription modelsGDPR-sensitive apps that don't want to transfer revenue data to any third party in any formMid-to-large companies with an already mature server team that don't mind JWS verificationLong-lived enterprise products that want to avoid vendor lock-inBusiness rules with high customization needs that don't fit RevenueCat's abstraction

Code Comparison

RevenueCat
// RevenueCat - Entitlement check and purchase (iOS SDK 5.x)
import RevenueCat

func configureRevenueCat() {
    Purchases.logLevel = .debug
    Purchases.configure(withAPIKey: "appl_XXXXXXXXXXXX")
}

func unlockProIfEntitled() async {
    do {
        let customerInfo = try await Purchases.shared.customerInfo()
        if customerInfo.entitlements["pro"]?.isActive == true {
            print("Pro entitlement active")
        }
    } catch {
        print("customerInfo error: \(error)")
    }
}

func purchasePro() async {
    do {
        let offerings = try await Purchases.shared.offerings()
        guard let package = offerings.current?.availablePackages.first else { return }

        let result = try await Purchases.shared.purchase(package: package)
        if result.customerInfo.entitlements["pro"]?.isActive == true {
            print("Purchase successful, pro active")
        }
    } catch {
        print("Purchase error: \(error)")
    }
}
StoreKit 2 (kendi altyapın)
// StoreKit 2 - Transaction listening and entitlement check (your own stack)
import StoreKit

func listenForTransactions() -> Task<Void, Error> {
    Task.detached {
        for await result in Transaction.updates {
            switch result {
            case .verified(let transaction):
                await grantEntitlement(for: transaction)
                await transaction.finish()
            case .unverified(_, let error):
                print("Verification failed: \(error)")
            }
        }
    }
}

func checkCurrentEntitlement() async -> Bool {
    for await result in Transaction.currentEntitlements {
        guard case .verified(let transaction) = result else { continue }
        if transaction.productID == "pro_monthly" {
            return true
        }
    }
    return false
}

func purchase(product: Product) async throws {
    let result = try await product.purchase()
    switch result {
    case .success(let verification):
        guard case .verified(let transaction) = verification else { return }
        await grantEntitlement(for: transaction)
        await transaction.finish()
    case .userCancelled, .pending:
        break
    @unknown default:
        break
    }
}

func grantEntitlement(for transaction: Transaction) async {
    // Send the JWS to your server, cross-verify with the App Store Server API
}

Conclusion

The threshold is clear: below $2,500 in monthly tracked revenue (MTR), RevenueCat is practically free — what you're comparing there isn't 1%, it's zero cost, and your own stack is always more expensive next to that. For a single-product, GDPR-sensitive app selling only on the App Store, plain StoreKit 2 is defensible. If you're multi-store, keeping RTDN's 18 notification types in sync with App Store V2 notifications gets expensive; as a rough rule of thumb, reweigh the decision once MTR passes $50,000+.

Get Free Consultation
FAQ

Frequently Asked Questions

If your monthly tracked revenue (MTR) is below $2,500, RevenueCat is practically free and takes on multi-store server-side verification, webhooks, and refund management — in that case, RevenueCat generally makes sense. For a single-platform, simple single-product app that doesn't want to hand revenue data to a third party, plain StoreKit 2 is a defensible option. Writing your own stack for a growing, multi-store product usually ends up more expensive.

Related Blog Posts

View All Posts
All Comparisons