ASO.dev and ASOmobile in 2026: What Should an ASO Specialist Choose?

We are the ASO.dev team, comparing our own product with ASOmobile. That is why we separately show the scenarios where the competitor is stronger. We call unverified capabilities unknown rather than missing.

The research was completed on August 9, 2026. Traffic/SAP, API, and product capabilities were rechecked on August 18, and pricing on August 19; the next review is due by November 19. Prices below are in US dollars and exclude tax.

ASOmobile sells a quota bundle; ASO.dev sells a workspace seat. The ASOmobile bundle includes apps, tracked keywords, competitors, users, review replies, AI, and API credits. This is convenient for a known portfolio, but exhausting one resource can require moving to the next plan.

ASO.dev is built around the person. The main subscription unit is a seat because you cannot know in advance whether the 501st keyword, the 11th app, or a new competitor will produce a useful hypothesis.

That is why apps, keyword lists, and manually added competitors in the core ASO workflow are not billed one by one.

The same applies to connected accounts and workspaces. However, every colleague actively working in the product needs a separate seat.

This is not an “everything is unlimited” promise. The plan determines history depth and available workflows, while compute and machine-access channels keep technical limits:

• Tasks limit the size of individual computations;
• Subscriptions limit the number of active rules;
• SOV limits the monitored keyword-and-country set;
• Developer API limits machine requests and credits.

The practical effect is clear for a 10-app portfolio. For one specialist, ASO.dev Pro at $828 per year is the realistic baseline. For three people, ASOmobile Pro at $1,140 is nominally cheaper, but all three share 1,500 keywords. A simple even split leaves 500 keywords per specialist or 150 per app across a 10-app portfolio.

Each of the three ASO.dev Pro seats can work across the whole portfolio: apps, keyword lists, and manually added competitors do not consume a team quota. The separate technical limits for Tasks, Subscriptions, SOV, and Developer API still apply.

Compared with ASO.dev, ASOmobile has five practical advantages:

• Two stores in one interface. ASOmobile combines App Store and Google Play keyword analysis and adds its own download and revenue estimates. We have a Google Play Console workflow, but we do not claim equivalent Android keyword intelligence or a full equivalent of two-store market estimates.
• Several routes to keywords. App Keywords, Keyword Finder, Keyword Check, Keyword Suggest, Keyword Select, Spy Keywords, Spy Competitors, and Worldwide Check provide different entry points into suggestions, rankings, and competitor gaps. If Google Play keywords are a material part of daily work, that alone can justify choosing ASOmobile or keeping it as a second source.
• A small team can work in the browser. The free plan lets users evaluate the interface, while Pro includes three users with access to all or selected apps. Comments, assignments, approvals, and an activity log are not publicly confirmed.
• A REST API without an alpha label. ASOmobile’s public API is not described as a test product, so it looks more established for a production server integration. We explain its quotas, costs, and distinction from MCP once below.
• Broad geography. Official materials confirm both stores and many countries, but disagree on the numbers: 90+ countries and 10 million apps versus 60+ countries and 3 million. Check the required country and tool rather than applying a global coverage claim to every API method.

When the work is centered on the App Store and must end with a store release, ASO.dev has five practical advantages:

• Organic keywords and competitors. One-click Tasks find the competitive set and up to 20,000 candidates, while Keywords Competitors combines several apps’ rankings in one table without pagination. Dataset size depends on what is found, and the specialist still validates relevance.
• Large working datasets. On Pro, the Keywords Competitors table can be filtered, sorted, and exported in full to Excel or CSV without per-row Developer API credits. An export does not guarantee 20,000 useful keywords for every app, and the external model may have its own cost.
• A global release workflow. ASO.dev connects research with the bulk editor and App Store Connect: metadata, screenshots, video, and page variants stay in one workflow. A person approves the result, while the iOS binary is still uploaded through Xcode, Fastlane, or CI.
• Apple Ads and creatives. Marketing shows Ads 1, Ads 2, advertisers, and actual creatives in Ads by Keyword, while SOV keeps check history. This observes Search Results; it does not manage advertising campaigns.
• A portfolio for one specialist. Apps, keyword lists, and manually added competitors in the core ASO workflow are not billed individually. We consider Pro the realistic plan for ongoing work with 10 apps; every active colleague needs a seat, and compute workflows retain technical limits.

In the App Store, the number of named tools does not prove discovery depth. In ASO.dev, Spy and Keyword Explorer provide additional entry points into research.

Competitor Search and Organic Keywords Search start in one click. The second Task collects shared queries from the competitive set over the last seven complete days.

For long-tail queries, ASO.dev screens show suggestions and let users expand the suggestions for each result. The list can be filtered by word count, and SAP history is available beside the current value.

Competitor Search returns up to 50 apps for an owned app on Startup and up to 250 for any app on Pro/Marketing. Organic Keywords Search can return up to 20,000 keywords: automatic mode uses 25 competitors on Startup, while Pro/Marketing advanced modes support 25, 50, or 100 competitors.

Startup works with the selected owned app. On Pro/Marketing, automatic search works with any app; project and mixed modes require an app from the project. The public guide that still shows a 5,000 Startup limit trails the current server implementation. The specialist still validates relevance.

For multi-app comparison, we consider Keywords Competitors stronger than ASOmobile’s publicly documented Spy Keywords. It builds the union of selected competitors’ keywords for a country, date, and ranking ceiling (Top N), overlays your app and every competitor across two dates, and adds SAP, difficulty, suggestions, and advertising signals.

The server returns one complete result, the desktop table receives every row without pagination, and only the visible area is virtualized. Filters, sorting, and Excel/CSV operate on the whole dataset. ASOmobile confirms multi-competitor comparison, gap discovery, and XLS on Max, but does not publish the maximum app count, set logic, or row and file limits.

100%

Large table of app and competitor keyword rankings in ASO.dev

100%

Large table of app and competitor keyword rankings in ASO.dev

Keyword List checks rankings every four hours and keeps history with the check timestamp. Competitor rankings use a daily snapshot; SAP refreshes separately each day. ASOmobile says Keyword Monitor updates roughly every six hours in the App Store and twelve hours in Google Play, plus manual refresh. Other pages say four hours or daily tracking, while App Keywords says 48 hours. There is no single public refresh rate for all data.

Top Charts, category history, Similar Apps, Timeline, and locale analysis are not unique to ASOmobile. In ASO.dev, Top shows free, paid, top-grossing, and new apps, while Category Ranking shows a snapshot and history.

App Info shows related apps and a reverse recommendation graph.

Changelog records versions, copy, icon, screenshots, and localizations for any App Store app.

App Overview collects localizations and store cards by country, while App Clash compares multiple apps and visual elements. This covers the practical need for charts across keywords, categories, locales, and competitors, although the fields and interface are not one-to-one copies of ASOmobile.

Apple’s competitor Keywords field is private, so an external service cannot read it directly. The practical substitute is to monitor public copy, organic rankings, and the query set in which an app starts or stops ranking; icons and screenshots can be compared directly.

ASOmobile Timeline separately lists price, category, and size. Its public description does not confirm a specific notification channel for competitor metadata changes. ASO.dev Changelog keeps history, but we also do not yet promise device notifications or webhooks for those changes.

ASOmobile’s real advantage at this stage is one web interface for two stores, Store Insights, featuring data, and modeled download and revenue estimates. The main market-intelligence modules are available on Maximum; proprietary estimates are not direct competitor reporting.

This uncertainty matters for any model that relies on SAP. From late September to early October 2025, Apple sharply changed Popularity: the number of US queries with SAP above 5 fell by 77.4%, and the API began returning 5 for many keywords. We documented this anomaly in detail.

ASO.dev shows SAP sourced from Apple, its history, and check time instead of turning an indirect signal into a pseudo-precise search count. After the anomaly, the displayed average explicitly excludes new distorted fives while raw values remain in history.

In our internal observations, we refreshed SAP more often and across a broader query pool than the comparable ASOmobile screen. There is no public independent comparison of frequency and coverage.

ASOmobile Search Ads Spy shows advertised apps by keyword, an app’s advertising keywords, SAP, countries, period, and impression share. We found no public confirmation of Google Ads data, Apple campaign management, Ads 1/Ads 2 classification, or discovery of actual custom product pages and advertising creatives.

Apple Ads shows both ad placements: Ads 1 and Ads 2.

Ads by Keyword shows advertisers, actual creatives, and CPP.

App Ads provides the reverse path from an app to advertising keywords and creatives. A selected asset can return up to 5,000 related queries. This is a result limit, not attribution and not 5,000 keywords for every screenshot.

An active Marketing subscription monitors SOV for 200 keyword-and-country combinations roughly every seven minutes.

A separate dynamic pool with average SAP (AvgPopularity) of at least 60 contained about 45,000 queries on the review date. New results are published roughly every 20 minutes, but that does not mean a full pass through the pool every 20 minutes; SAP itself refreshes daily. The timestamp shows when we checked, not when Apple changed the data.

ASO.dev does not manage bids or advertising campaigns. We also did not confirm Google Ads integration or campaign management for ASOmobile. This comparison is about observing Search Results and competitors, not replacing an advertising console.

ASO Creator imports copy, checks length, coverage, and duplicates, creates a draft in a selected language, and exports a file. We found no public confirmation of direct metadata and screenshot submission, bulk media work, releases, built-in A/B tests, custom product pages, or product-page experiments. This is an evidence boundary, not a claim that a private feature definitely does not exist.

In ASO.dev, research continues into practical work. App Overview and App Clash help verify localizations and visual assets.

The Metadata Editor works with 50 App Store localizations. The Figma workflow moves copy through JSON/ZIP while preserving Auto Layout, Variables, and RTL.

Screenshots and video are mapped across localizations and devices. Agent Skills help turn media, feature, and review observations into a testable hypothesis list.

The same media workflow applies to the default product page, CPP, and PPO; PPO supports up to three variants.

After review, a person explicitly submits changes for review and publishing.

Versions and releases are managed in App Store Connect or Google Play Console.

This is a global, controlled workflow rather than an autonomous autopilot. People review translations and visuals, while Xcode, Fastlane, or CI still uploads the iOS binary.

ASO.dev is not only a keyword tracker. Beyond this workflow, the product includes analytical screens and separate work areas for stores, advertising, reviews, and automation. The full map is below; it does not mean that every feature is included in one plan.

Total cost of ownership (TCO) depends not only on plan price but also on what is constrained. The current public ASOmobile matrix is:

ASOmobile Indie does not cover 10 apps, so Pro is the minimum suitable bundle. Fifty keywords for 10 apps create 500 app-and-keyword combinations; 200 create 2,000, already above Pro. If five countries are counted separately, the range grows to 2,500–10,000 combinations.

Our Startup costs $39 monthly or $348 annually per seat, does not cap the portfolio at the tenth app, and suits an independent developer’s first cycle. But we do not present it as a professional Pro equivalent: ranking history is limited to 30 days, with no exports, CPP, App Clash, Changelog, or extended history. PPO is available.

For ongoing work with 10 apps, we budget ASO.dev Pro at $828 per year per person. It costs $89 monthly. Marketing with Apple Ads costs $199 monthly or $1,788 annually.

An ASO.dev team can organize payment in two ways. Each specialist can subscribe through their own account while the team collaborates through shared workspaces. Or one payer can add several seats to a single purchase during checkout.

In both cases, every active specialist keeps an individual account and seat. The payment setup changes; the core ASO capacity available to each seat does not.

The per-person and per-app figures illustrate the capacity of one shared bundle; they are not a published ASOmobile billing unit. A team may distribute keywords differently, and the public materials do not explain how countries and devices affect consumption.

On seat price alone, ASOmobile looks cheaper: Pro saves $1,344 compared with three ASO.dev Pro seats, while Max saves $1,944 compared with five. Yet the whole team shares 1,500 keywords in the first case and 4,000 in the second. With us, each specialist gets a seat without competing for a shared keyword pool; only the compute and machine-access channels listed above have separate limits.

ASOmobile’s saving is therefore real for narrow, predefined semantics. If every specialist regularly researches organic keywords across several apps, countries, and competitors, comparing only the number and price of included users is not enough.

These scenarios use different channels and have different economics.

ASOmobile REST API. A personal Bearer token starts an asynchronous request and retrieves JSON by result ID. App Keywords works with one app and one country; a separate method works with one app and a country list. The schema has no pagination parameters: no page number, cursor, or link to the next portion. This does not prove an unbounded result.

The maximum request and response size, call frequency and concurrency, polling cost, result lifetime, and per-method cost are not publicly described. Several responses can be combined in custom code, but throughput and total credit cost for dozens of apps and countries cannot be promised in advance.

The latest explicit App Keywords limit is 3,500 indexed queries. Spy Keywords compares several competitors, finds gaps, and exports XLS, but a multi-app API method, exact set logic, row and file limits, and a 20,000+ row export are not documented. We did not confirm 20,000+ rows from a single-app analysis through either the interface or API; that is unknown, not prohibited.

An older official article mentions 13,000+, but does not explain whether this was a sum across countries or a different metric. We therefore use the latest clearly defined limit.

ASOmobile’s public MCP. The published configuration starts Apidog MCP with a site identifier and no ASOmobile Bearer token. Its tools read the OpenAPI specification to assist with coding; they do not call the API with access to working data. A documentation MCP is therefore confirmed, while an MCP for direct data access is not publicly confirmed. Reading the specification should not consume API credits; working REST calls do, while ASOmobile’s AI quota and the external model cost are separate.

A separate marketing page describes an agent retrieving current data. However, we found no public remote MCP endpoint, data-tool catalog, or authorization contract, so we do not apply that promise to the published Apidog configuration.

ASO.dev. Organic Keywords Task is limited to 20,000 rows, while Keyword Overview can produce up to 50,000.

Keywords Competitors on Pro exports the discovered union in full, after filtering, or by selection. It can exceed 20,000 rows only when enough source data exists; this is not a promise of 20,000 useful keywords for every app.

Local MCP deliberately does not expose the entire database. A large dataset is exported to Excel/CSV without per-row Developer API credits and analyzed in an external model.

The shortlist returns to Keyword List. MCP context is limited to the selected workspace, a supported editor, and the current or loaded review list.

MCP listens only on a local address, requires X-Client-Secret, and requires approval plus confirmApply for writes. It does not consume Developer API credits, but the selected external model may cost money.

The practical workflow has three steps: export the full file, analyze it in Codex, ChatGPT, Claude, or another model, and return the shortlist to Keyword List. MCP supports actions in editors and reviews; it is not for streaming tens of thousands of rows to a model one by one.

ASO.dev Developer API is a separate channel. Alpha testing is open for Pro+ applications, the portal offers 10,000 test credits and token creation, and available methods already cover apps and metadata, rankings and history, keyword popularity and demand, and category charts. Contracts, limits, and economics are still being tested, and there is no public SLA. Alpha applies to the API, not the local MCP.

ASOmobile collects App Store and Google Play reviews and provides filters, translation, templates, tags, charts, reply history, and XLS. Users can reply after connecting a store account; the monthly limit depends on the plan.

The official App Store instructions ask users to create a separate Customer Support user and enter its email address, password, and 2FA code into ASOmobile; Google Play connects through OAuth. We found no public description of credential storage or encryption.

Review webhooks, Slack/Teams/Zendesk routing, auto-reply rules, and a fully automatic server mode are also unconfirmed. A template alone does not prove automatic submission.

Our New Reviews Subscription monitors an app, country, and event combination. The result remains in Notifications and reaches the device.

On Pro/Marketing, a webhook sends a summary and a link to the full CSV. Active-rule limits are 2,500 / 6,500 / 13,000 on Startup / Pro / Marketing; treat the public CSV URL as a temporary secret.

A separate Reviews Export Task collects selected App Store countries for sentiment, theme, recurring-problem, and feature-request analysis. It turns a review stream into hypotheses but does not send replies without a user decision.

The Reviews interface creates and edits App Store and Google Play replies. Bulk AI replies use the instruction, provider, and model selected by the user; a person starts processing for the selected group.

MCP can draft, submit or edit a reply after confirmation, and report an App Store review. We do not promise a persistent event-driven server autopilot.

By default, the App Store Connect key and Google service account stay on the device.

Protected storage restricts local access, and requests go directly to Apple/Google or through the user’s proxy. Optional encrypted synchronization is convenient for a team but expands the security boundary.

Google Play reviews expose only a recently modified feed of roughly seven days, not a complete historical archive.

In this setup, ASO.dev is the central working point rather than a universal integration system. We do not promise automatic two-way synchronization of ASOmobile’s proprietary metrics: validated hypotheses and lists move between services, not the other provider’s full dataset.

ASO.dev vs ASOmobile: which should I choose for 10 apps?

For one specialist with an App Store portfolio, ASO.dev Pro costs $828 per year. For three people, ASOmobile Pro at $1,140 is cheaper by seat price, but gives the whole team one pool of 1,500 keywords—illustratively 500 per person or 150 for each of 10 apps. For broader semantics, each ASO.dev Pro seat works without a team keyword quota.

Is ASOmobile a competitor, equivalent, or alternative to ASO.dev?

It competes in keywords, monitoring, reviews, and part of Apple Ads, but it is not a complete equivalent. ASOmobile is stronger in Google Play and modeled estimates for two stores; ASO.dev is stronger in deep App Store work and direct execution.

Which ASOmobile alternative is suitable for publishing?

If the reason for switching is metadata, bulk screenshots, CPP/PPO, App Store Connect, Google Play Console, and releases in one workflow, that is a core ASO.dev area. If Android keywords and modeled market estimates matter more, we do not call ourselves a full replacement; ASOmobile can remain a second source.

Can I replace ASOmobile and keep the history?

Export keywords, competitors, and reports together with country, store, device, and timestamp definitions, then run parallel tracking in ASO.dev. Proprietary Traffic, CI/KEI, and modeled estimates cannot be guaranteed to transfer one to one.

Can ASOmobile export 20,000+ keywords?

This is not publicly confirmed. The known App Keywords limit is about 3,500, while multi-app XLS and API limits are undocumented. In ASO.dev Pro+, datasets and exports above 20,000 rows depend on the amount of source data found.

Does MCP consume API credits?

ASOmobile’s documentation MCP should not consume them; working REST calls do. The local ASO.dev MCP does not deduct Developer API credits, while the external model is billed separately.

Does ASO.dev reply to reviews automatically?

It processes a group selected by a person and submits confirmed replies from the interface or MCP. We do not promise a persistent server autopilot.

If a required feature is missing, suggest it or vote, or email hello@aso.dev.

Choose ASOmobile for Google Play keywords, modeled estimates for two stores, browser-based collaboration, and a published REST API. Choose ASO.dev when one specialist manages a broad App Store portfolio and must carry research through localization, creatives, reviews, and release. Use both when ASOmobile’s unique Google Play or market signal justifies the minimum bundle and the main work happens in ASO.dev.

For ASO.dev, we verified:

• pricing and Tasks;
• Subscriptions and App Store reviews;
• Google Play reviews and security;
• MCP and Developer API;
• the current product implementation.

Unknowns remain:

• the Traffic formula and its recalculation after the SAP change;
• the keyword quota unit, history depth, refresh rate, and overage prices;
• Max quota allocation, large-export limits, and API limits;
• MCP for working data, review automation, and credential storage;
• direct publishing, A/B/CPP/PPO, and Google Ads.

Unknown does not mean absent.