Powstania Warszawskiego 15
31-539 Kraków
Most comparisons of these two frameworks are written for engineers and answer a question you are not asking. You are not choosing a rendering architecture. You are choosing who can maintain the product in three years and how fast the first version reaches users. Here is the short version, then the reasoning.
When the product is being built from scratch, when the interface carries the experience, and when both platforms have to behave identically without a separate pass on each. Flutter draws its own interface, so what you approve in design is what appears on both stores, which removes a whole class of small differences that otherwise get discovered late.
It is our default for that reason, not because of benchmarks. Most of the business products we build have a demanding interface and no existing mobile codebase, and in that situation one implementation of the rules is worth more than any framework level performance difference.
It also fits products with long lifespans. Every operating system release and every dependency update is handled once instead of twice, and the two platforms cannot drift apart in behaviour because there is only one implementation to drift.
When your own engineers write JavaScript and will maintain the app, when the product shares meaningful logic with a web application, or when a React Native codebase already exists. In all three cases the deciding factor is continuity: the people who keep the product alive should be working in a language they already know.
The web sharing case is the one most often underestimated. If validation rules, API clients and business logic already exist in TypeScript on the web, React Native lets you share them deliberately in one repository instead of maintaining two copies that quietly diverge. That is a structural saving that repeats every sprint.
The hiring case matters too. If your plan is to bring development in house within two years, count how many engineers in your market write each language before choosing. The framework that is easier to hire for in your city is the framework your product should be written in.
When the product is mostly platform specific behaviour, when extreme native performance is the product itself, when you need a brand new platform capability the day it ships, or when what you actually need is not a mobile app at all. Each of those has a cheaper answer than a cross platform build.
For Flutter specifically, the six cases where we would pick native or another stack, such as watch apps, 3D and augmented reality, or web products that need search traffic, and the requirements that only sound like dealbreakers, are covered in when not to use Flutter.
Not the framework. Cost is driven by the operation behind the app: payments, offline behaviour, integrations with existing systems, and the number of user roles with different permissions. The same product built in either framework lands in the same range, and the same product with three enterprise integrations costs several times more in both.
Payments and subscriptions add store rules, edge cases and a review conversation. Offline behaviour adds a second source of truth and everything that comes with reconciling it. Every external system you integrate is a party who can change an API without asking you.
User roles are the quiet one. Two roles is a feature. Five roles with different permissions is an architecture, and it shows up in design, in the backend and in testing, three times over.
We keep our figures on the pricing page rather than in articles, and the reasoning behind the ranges is in our guides to mobile app development cost and what an MVP app costs.
Decisions and access, not the framework. Eight to twelve weeks from approved scope to a published first version is the normal range in either technology. What moves that date is how fast one person on your side can decide, and whether developer accounts and third party keys exist before the sprint that needs them.
Setting up and configuring an Apple developer account is not a quick task, and it has delayed real releases for us. So has waiting on API keys for a system the client already owned. Neither has anything to do with Flutter or React Native.
Store review adds its own step. On marketplaces, bookings and subscriptions, Apple checks whether payments should be running through in app purchases. It is resolved by explaining the model, but it is a predictable stage to plan for rather than a surprise in the final week.
If your product needs a platform capability released in the last few months, native support arrives first and cross platform packages follow. That is the only place where the framework choice can genuinely move a launch date, and it applies to both of them.
This is the question that should carry the most weight and usually carries the least. Ask who will change this product in two years. If it is your own engineers, the answer is whichever language they already write. If it is an agency, ask what they actually build in, because a team working outside its default is slower and more expensive on every change.
An app is not finished at launch. Operating systems and store policies move every year whether or not you are building, so somebody is going to open that codebase again regardless of your roadmap. The framework decision is really a decision about who that person is.
The related question is what you are handed at the end. A repository, a build pipeline, written architecture decisions and a release checklist make any framework maintainable by a new team. Their absence makes both frameworks expensive, which is why we treat handover as part of delivery rather than as a favour. What that costs to keep running is broken down in our guide to app maintenance cost.
Flutter is our default for new products, with Dart, BLoC and Riverpod, and it is what most of our shipped apps are built in. We use React Native when the client has JavaScript engineers, when logic is shared with a web product, or when an existing React Native app is being taken over. The decision is made in scoping, before any contract.
We also maintain a React Native monorepo setup for products that share code with a web application, which is described on our React Native monorepo page. The point is not that one framework won. It is that the choice is made from your situation, not from ours.
Three questions, in this order. Who maintains this in two years? Does meaningful logic already exist in TypeScript? Does the product depend on anything platform specific? The answers usually settle it within the first conversation, and if they do not, the honest answer is that either framework would work and the decision should be made on hiring.
Neither is better in general, and any article that says otherwise is selling something. Flutter is the stronger default when you start from scratch and the interface carries the product. React Native is the stronger default when your own engineers write JavaScript or you share logic with a web application. The right question is which one fits your team and your product, not which one wins a benchmark.
They land in the same range for the same product. What moves the number is payments, offline behaviour, integrations and the number of user roles, none of which is framework specific. If someone quotes you a large difference between the two for identical scope, ask what changed in the scope.
Technically yes, in practice it is a rewrite of the mobile layer. Your backend and your data survive, your app does not. That is why the choice is worth an hour of thought before the project starts rather than a decision made on preference in the first sprint.
It depends entirely on your market, so count rather than assume. React Native draws from the much larger JavaScript pool, which usually means more candidates but wider variance in mobile specific experience. Flutter has a smaller pool that is more consistently mobile focused. Check both in your own city before deciding.
Rarely, for the kind of business apps this article is about. Users notice speed, reliability and whether the app works when the connection is poor. Those are architecture and quality decisions, not framework decisions, and both frameworks let you get them right or wrong.
Start with an audit rather than a framework debate. The question is what state the code is in and whether it can still be built with current tools, not which technology you would pick today. Continuing is often far cheaper than rebuilding, and sometimes it is not. We describe how a takeover works on our app rescue page.
Thomas sets the company's long term strategy and direction, identifies market opportunities, and owns business development and client acquisition. He builds strategic partnerships that last beyond a single project. He works with clients from the first strategy conversation, so their business goals, not just their feature list, drive every decision.
Tell us what the app has to do and who will maintain it afterwards. We will give you a straight recommendation, including the one where we say you do not need us.
Book an intro call