CHARLOTTE TILBURY: EASY BEAUTY vs FSD Hunter
Revenue, downloads, ratings and category context for two iOS apps. Figures are estimates and should be read as ranges, not exact totals.
CHARLOTTE TILBURY: EASY BEAUTYCharlotte Tilbury Beauty Limited - Shopping
FSD HunterDavid Hugenberg - Shopping| Metric | CHARLOTTE TILBURY: EASY BEAUTY | FSD Hunter | 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 | CHARLOTTE TILBURY: EASY BEAUTY |
| Download band | $*** - opens with trial | $*** - opens with trial | Use range + confidence |
| Rating | - | 4.33 | FSD Hunter |
| Rating count | - | 64 | FSD Hunter |
| Tracked keywords | — | — | Tie |
| Category | Shopping | Shopping | Same market |
Which app is bigger?
CHARLOTTE TILBURY: EASY BEAUTY and FSD Hunter are compared inside Shopping with monthly revenue, downloads, rating, review volume, keyword footprint, category placement and range context. CHARLOTTE TILBURY: EASY BEAUTY leads on monthly downloads in the current readout, while a clean revenue readout is available only for FSD Hunter in this pair. CHARLOTTE TILBURY: EASY BEAUTY wins demand, FSD Hunter 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.