How Much Does a Mobile App Cost: A Realistic Budget

A mobile app costs between 8000 and 25000 euros for a simple single-platform project, and between 25000 and 80000 euros or more for a complex cross-platform project with a dedicated backend. The price gap doesn't come from the number of screens displayed but from what happens behind the scenes: account management, data synchronization, connections to third-party services, and ongoing maintenance in the face of constant operating system updates.

Why a mobile app's budget often comes as a surprise

Many project owners compare a mobile app's budget to that of a website, expecting a similar order of magnitude. This is a common comparison mistake. A website runs in a single browser, with shared standards. A mobile app must work across different operating systems (iOS, Android), follow each store's strict rules, handle forced updates to these systems, and often function without a stable internet connection.

The second source of surprise is maintenance. Unlike a site that can stay stable for years without major work, a mobile app needs regular updates to stay compatible with new versions of iOS and Android, or it eventually stops working or gets removed from the store. This recurring cost, often absent from initial quotes, generally represents 15 to 25% of development cost per year.

Finally, whether or not there's a backend (a server that stores and syncs data) radically changes the budget. An app that only displays embedded static content stays simple and low-cost. As soon as it manages user accounts, data shared across devices, or personalized notifications, a dedicated server becomes necessary, with its own development, hosting, and security.

Native, cross-platform, or progressive web app

Native development (Swift for iOS, Kotlin for Android) produces the most performant apps, best integrated with each system, but doubles the work since two separate codebases must be written and maintained. This is the most expensive option, reserved for projects where performance or access to very specific system features justifies the investment.

Cross-platform development (Flutter, React Native) allows a large part of the code to be written once for both systems, significantly reducing the budget compared to native while keeping a close experience. This is the most common approach today for professional apps with a controlled budget.

The progressive web app (a website that behaves like an app, installable from the browser) costs noticeably less than a real native app, but remains limited on certain deep phone features (advanced notifications, extensive hardware access) and isn't distributed on the standard stores. For a simple need for mobile presence, this is often an underestimated and largely sufficient option.

What makes the price vary within the same project

The number of screens and user flows. An app with 5 simple screens obviously costs less than an app with 30 screens and complex conditional flows.

The presence of a user account. Sign-up, login, password management, possibly social media login: each building block adds development and security considerations.

Third-party integrations. In-app payment, geolocation, push notifications, connection to an external service (weather, mapping, CRM): each integration has its own setup and testing cost.

Custom design. An interface fully designed for the brand costs more than dressing up standard components, but often remains necessary to stand out in a saturated store.

Store validation. Apple and Google impose validation rules that can delay the launch and require unanticipated adjustments at the initial quote stage.

Costs often missing from the initial quote

Store fees. Apple charges an annual fee to publish on the App Store, and Google requires a one-time fee for the Play Store. These are modest amounts compared to the development budget, but they add to the total cost and are sometimes forgotten in the initial calculation.

Server infrastructure costs. Once a backend exists, hosting, the database, and possibly push notification services carry a monthly cost that grows with the number of active users, independent of the development budget itself.

Visual refresh. An app whose interface never evolves eventually looks dated next to competitors who keep refreshing theirs. Planning a periodic visual refresh budget, separate from simple bug fixes, avoids this gradual aging.

Testing across a varied device fleet. Android in particular covers a multitude of different models and screen sizes. Testing limited to a single reference device often lets bugs through that only appear on certain models used by a real portion of users.

Estimating the right level of ambition for a first launch

As with a SaaS product, the most costly mistake in a mobile app project is wanting to develop every imagined feature in the first version. A mobile app launched with a tight scope focused on the essentials lets you check real usage by users before investing in more advanced features, which are often used less than expected once the product is in real-world conditions.

This gradual approach reduces financial risk and lets you adjust development priorities based on real feedback, rather than untested assumptions formulated before the first launch.

Budget table by project type

Budget for the first update, not just the launch

Launching an app is never the end of the project. The first feedback from real users almost always reveals necessary adjustments, whether bug fixes not caught during testing or usability improvements identified once the app is in the hands of a wider audience than the development team. Planning a budget dedicated to this first wave of adjustments, separate from the initial development budget, avoids having to interrupt the app's use for lack of resources to fix what users report in the first few weeks.

Key takeaways

• A mobile app's budget mainly depends on the presence of a backend, third-party integrations, and the number of target platforms, not the number of visible screens.
• Cross-platform development (Flutter, React Native) significantly reduces cost compared to pure native, for a very similar experience in most cases.
• A progressive web app remains an underestimated option for a simple mobile need, as long as you accept its limits on certain deep phone features.
• Annual maintenance (15 to 25% of initial cost) is a recurring budget to plan for from the start, not a surprise after launch.
• No-code can be enough for a prototype or a very simple need, but quickly hits its limits once its own business logic comes into play.
• Comparing two app quotes means checking whether backend, integrations, and maintenance are included in the quoted scope.

Conclusion

Before requesting a mobile app quote, clarify whether a mobile-first website or a progressive web app wouldn't be enough to meet the real need, for much less money. If the project genuinely requires a dedicated app with its own business logic, custom development at VeryAppi helps precisely scope the functional needs before quoting, rather than starting from a rough budget.