With the top app stores flooded with AI apps, developers may think their best bet to turn a profit is to incorporate AI technology into their own products. However, a new study focused on the ecosystem of subscription apps on iOS, Android, and the web calls that assumption into question.
RevenueCata company that offers subscription management tools used by more than 75,000 app developers, told the 2026 Membership Status Applications Report that the incorporation of artificial intelligence is no guarantee of long-term preservation. In contrast, AI apps struggle to retain subscribers, with people canceling their annual subscriptions – a metric known as churn – 30% faster than non-AI apps, according to the report.
The report is based on an analysis of subscription app providers that use RevenueCat’s tools to manage more than 1 billion in-app transactions, generating more than $11 billion in revenue for developers annually. As one of the most popular tools in this space, its data represents a healthy sample in terms of trend analysis.
Among the many interesting findings, the report noted that most of the applications using the company’s platform are not yet powered by AI. AI-powered apps account for 27.1% of apps across all categories, compared to 72.9% for non-AI apps. However, it’s a growing category, with around one in four apps now powered by artificial intelligence.
(To be clear, the AI ​​app category includes popular AI chatbots like ChatGPT and Gemini, as well as any app that advertises itself as AI.)
Photo and video apps have the largest share (61.4%) of AI-powered apps, while games have the smallest share at 6.2%. Travel (12.3%) and business (19.1%) are also low AI segments.
The most surprising figures concern the ability of AI applications to retain paying customers. AI apps underperform retention both monthly and annually, RevenueCat data shows.
Annual retention, a metric that focuses on an app’s ability to retain subscribers after 12 months, was 21.1% for AI apps, compared to a higher 30.7% for non-AI apps. On a monthly basis, AI apps saw retention rates of 6.1% versus 9.5% for non-AI — a difference of 3.4 percentage points.
The only area where AI led retention was on the weekly front, where AI apps had 2.5% retention rates compared to 1.7% for non-AI apps. It’s worth noting that weekly subscriptions aren’t the most popular option for AI apps.
These metrics could be affected by the rapidly changing state of AI technology, which could see users jump between different AI apps more quickly as they try to find the one with the latest technology under the hood.
As customers experiment with an increasing number of AI applications, they are also more likely to find that some do not meet their needs. The report notes that AI apps have 20% higher refund rates (4.2% vs. 3.5% median) than non-AI apps.
The upper limit of refund rates for AI apps is also higher (15.6% vs. 12.5%), suggesting there is “greater volatility in realized revenue and deeper issues in user value, experience and long-term quality,” the report notes.
There are some advantages to being in the cohort of AI-powered apps, the data shows.
RevenueCat found that AI apps convert users from trials to paid customers 52% better than non-AI apps (8.5% vs. 5.6% median), and AI apps monetize their downloads about 20% better than non-AI apps (2.4% vs. 2% median).
AI apps also generate 39% or higher monthly realized lifetime value (RLTV), a metric that measures the true net worth of an average paying user over time. AI apps in this metric average $18.92 per month, compared to $13.59 for non-AI apps. AI Apps also maintains an RLTV of 41% or higher year-over-year, at $30.16 vs. $21.37, also on average.
The overall takeaway from the report’s findings is that AI can drive strong, early monetization, but these apps struggle to maintain their value to customers over time.
