Buffer: Plan & Schedule Posts vs Threads
Revenue, downloads, ratings and category context for two iOS apps. Figures are estimates and should be read as ranges, not exact totals.
Buffer: Plan & Schedule PostsBuffer, Inc. - Social Networking
ThreadsInstagram, Inc. - Social Networking| Metric | Buffer: Plan & Schedule Posts | Threads | Readout |
|---|---|---|---|
| Estimated revenue / mo | $*** - opens with trial | $*** - opens with trial | Partial signal |
| Revenue band | $*** - opens with trial | $*** - opens with trial | Use range + confidence |
| Estimated downloads / mo | $*** - opens with trial | $*** - opens with trial | Threads |
| Download band | $*** - opens with trial | $*** - opens with trial | Use range + confidence |
| Rating | - | 4.64 | Threads |
| Rating count | - | 2.1M | Threads |
| Tracked keywords | — | — | Tie |
| Category | Social Networking | Social Networking | Same market |
Which app is bigger?
Buffer: Plan & Schedule Posts and Threads are compared inside Social Networking with monthly revenue, downloads, rating, review volume, keyword footprint, category placement and range context. Threads leads on monthly downloads in the current readout, while a clean revenue readout is available only for Buffer: Plan & Schedule Posts in this pair. Threads wins demand, Threads has deeper review volume, and Tie has the larger tracked keyword footprint. The better app depends on the job: choose the revenue leader when you need monetization proof, choose the download leader when reach matters, and choose the higher-rated or deeper-reviewed app when market trust is the constraint. Read both ranges rather than only the midpoint, then open the category hub and related collections to see whether this pair is an outlier or a normal category pattern.