Flsieļ¼Live Video Chat & Share vs Roost Social
Revenue, downloads, ratings and category context for two iOS apps. Figures are estimates and should be read as ranges, not exact totals.
Flsieļ¼Live Video Chat & Shareåē½ å¾ - Social Networking
Roost SocialLogan Mendelsohn - Social Networking| Metric | Flsieļ¼Live Video Chat & Share | Roost Social | Readout |
|---|---|---|---|
| Estimated revenue / mo | $*** - opens with trial | $*** - opens with trial | Roost Social |
| Revenue band | $*** - opens with trial | $*** - opens with trial | Use range + confidence |
| Estimated downloads / mo | $*** - opens with trial | $*** - opens with trial | Roost Social |
| Download band | $*** - opens with trial | $*** - opens with trial | Use range + confidence |
| Rating | - | - | Tie |
| Rating count | - | - | Tie |
| Tracked keywords | 3 | ā | Flsieļ¼Live Video Chat & Share |
| Category | Social Networking | Social Networking | Same market |
Which app is bigger?
Flsieļ¼Live Video Chat & Share and Roost Social are compared inside Social Networking with monthly revenue, downloads, rating, review volume, keyword footprint, category placement and range context. Roost Social leads on monthly downloads in the current readout, and Roost Social wins the revenue readout (the exact figures open with the paid plan), Roost Social wins demand, Tie has deeper review volume, and Flsieļ¼Live Video Chat & Share 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.