PDF Filler: Edit & Sign vs DocScanner: PDF Scan
Revenue, downloads, ratings and category context for two iOS apps. Figures are estimates and should be read as ranges, not exact totals.
PDF Filler: Edit & SignAsad Ahsan - Productivity
DocScanner: PDF ScanYoussef Dhibi - Productivity| Metric | PDF Filler: Edit & Sign | DocScanner: PDF Scan | Readout |
|---|---|---|---|
| Estimated revenue / mo | $*** - opens with trial | $*** - opens with trial | PDF Filler: Edit & Sign |
| Revenue band | $*** - opens with trial | $*** - opens with trial | Use range + confidence |
| Estimated downloads / mo | $*** - opens with trial | $*** - opens with trial | PDF Filler: Edit & Sign |
| Download band | $*** - opens with trial | $*** - opens with trial | Use range + confidence |
| Rating | - | - | Tie |
| Rating count | - | - | Tie |
| Tracked keywords | — | — | Tie |
| Category | Productivity | Productivity | Same market |
Which app is bigger?
PDF Filler: Edit & Sign and DocScanner: PDF Scan are compared inside Productivity with monthly revenue, downloads, rating, review volume, keyword footprint, category placement and range context. PDF Filler: Edit & Sign leads on monthly downloads in the current readout, and PDF Filler: Edit & Sign wins the revenue readout (the exact figures open with the paid plan), PDF Filler: Edit & Sign wins demand, Tie 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.