Comparison · Attribution
Choosing an MMP
Four platforms, compared on the one thing a buyer can verify without a sales call: what each company is prepared to publish about its own pricing. Everything below was read off the vendors' own pages, because the comparison content that ranks for this is mostly affiliate material and it does not agree with itself.
- Checked
- 20 October 2026
- Platforms
- 4
- Publish a rate
- 3 of 4
- Paid by vendors
- None
What each one publishes
Start here rather than with features. A vendor that puts a number on its own page has made a commitment you can hold it to; a vendor that does not has decided your volumes are a negotiating position. Neither is sinister. But it tells you what the first call will be about.
| AppsFlyer | Adjust | Singular | Airbridge | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Free tier | Zero and Growth include 12,000 conversions in the first year | Base: 1,500 conversions a month for the first 12 months | Free: 15,000 paid conversions | Core: 30-day trial |
| Published rate | $0.07 per conversion on Growth after the free allowance | Not published; quote by annual conversion band | $0.05 per conversion on Growth | From $40 a month, 500,000 data points, then $0.0001 each |
| Cost aggregation | Listed on the plan comparison, not priced publicly | SpendWorks, an add-on for Core and Enterprise | Included from the free tier | Core covers Google, Meta, Apple Ads and TikTok only |
| Annual contract | Enterprise is custom | Quote | Enterprise is custom | None on Core |
| Owned by | AppsFlyer Ltd | AppLovin | Singular | AB180 |
Source: Each vendor's own pricing page, read 20 October 2026. Rates change and the plans are restructured regularly – check before you commit to anything.
Where cost aggregation sits is the real difference
Cost aggregation is the unglamorous bit that decides whether ROI exists in your dashboard or in a spreadsheet somebody rebuilds every Monday. It pulls spend out of each network automatically and joins it to attributed outcomes.
The four platforms treat it differently enough that it is the clearest split in the table. Singular includes it on the free plan, which is consistent with a product that was built as marketing analytics first. Adjust lists SpendWorks among the Growth Solutions available as paid add-ons to Core and Enterprise clients. AppsFlyer lists real-time ad spend aggregation, cost ETL and cost API integrations on its plan comparison without publishing what they cost. Airbridge includes it on Core, but only for Google, Meta, Apple Ads and TikTok.
So the question we see asked most often – which one gives ROI reporting out of the box without building custom dashboards – has an answer on published plans, and it is Singular. That is a fact about pricing pages, not a verdict on measurement quality, and the two should not be confused.
02
If you run exactly four channels
One of these is priced for a shape of advertiser that the others are not.
Airbridge's Core plan covers ad network attribution, postbacks, audiences and cost aggregation for Google, Meta, Apple Ads and TikTok, and nothing else. It starts at $40 a month with 500,000 data points included and no annual contract.
For a team buying on precisely those four, that is a different order of money from an enterprise MMP contract, and the restriction costs them nothing. The moment a fifth network matters – or custom events, or more than two third-party integrations – Core stops covering it and you are quoting Growth, at which point you are in the same conversation as everyone else and should run all four quotes.
Worth knowing for subscription apps specifically: Airbridge lists subscription revenue aggregation from RevenueCat and Adapty, so the revenue side can arrive without custom work. If your paywall already runs on one of those, that is a real saving in plumbing.
What genuinely does not differ
SKAdNetwork access. All four receive the same postbacks under the same Apple rules, all four offer conversion-value configuration, and Adjust states in its pricing FAQ that it does not charge extra for iOS 14+ and SKAN solutions. Where they differ is the ergonomics of the schema editor and the quality of the modelling on top, and neither of those is visible from a pricing page or from this article.
Integration breadth is the other axis that marketing overstates. Every one of them connects to the networks you are actually buying. The breadth argument only bites at the edges: domestic China, CTV, console, or a long tail of small networks.
03
How we would actually choose
In this order, and stopping as soon as one of them decides it.
- What is already installed. If an MMP is running and answering your questions, the correct choice is to keep it. Migration costs weeks and leaves a seam in the data that you will be explaining for a year.
- Where cost data has to come from. If nobody on the team is going to build and maintain cost pipelines, pick the platform that includes aggregation on a plan you will actually be on.
- How many networks you buy. Four or fewer and the cheap end of this market is open to you. More than that, and you are comparing enterprise quotes whatever the list price says.
- Who owns the vendor. Only if your buying overlaps with their media business. Ask the question, judge the answer.
- Everything else. Fraud tooling, incrementality, audiences, CTV. Real features, and almost never the thing that decides it for an app under a few million conversions a year.
If you want the two-way versions with more depth on each pair, we have written AppsFlyer against Adjust and Singular against AppsFlyer. The conversion-value schema that all of this eventually rests on is covered in the SKAdNetwork guide.
Questions people actually ask
- Which MMP has the best ROI reporting out of the box?
- On published plans, Singular: cost aggregation and ROI analytics sit on its free tier, so spend is joined to outcomes without anyone building a dashboard. Adjust lists SpendWorks, its cost product, among paid add-ons for Core and Enterprise clients. AppsFlyer lists real-time ad spend aggregation, cost ETL and cost APIs on its plan comparison but does not price them publicly. That is a statement about what each vendor publishes, not a measurement of quality.
- We run four channels and want revenue attribution. Which fits?
- If the four are Google, Meta, Apple Ads and TikTok, Airbridge is worth a look purely on cost: its Core plan covers exactly those four and starts at $40 a month with no annual contract. Add a fifth network and Core stops covering you, at which point you are quoting Growth against everyone else anyway.
- Is Adjust being owned by AppLovin a problem?
- It is a question to ask rather than a disqualification. Adjust has been an AppLovin company since 2021, and AppLovin also sells media. Plenty of teams run Adjust happily. If your buying includes AppLovin inventory and you care about who grades the homework, raise it on the call and listen to the answer.
- Do any of them charge extra for SKAdNetwork?
- Not on the published plans. Adjust says so explicitly in its pricing FAQ, and Singular and Airbridge both list SKAN reporting and conversion-value configuration on their entry plans. The differences are in tooling and modelling, not in access.
- Can you compare the prices directly?
- No, and anyone who does is quietly rounding. AppsFlyer and Singular price per conversion, Adjust prices by annual conversion bands on quote, and Airbridge prices per data point, where a data point is an event rather than a conversion. The same app produces very different counts under each. Use the published numbers to see what a vendor is willing to commit to in public, then get quotes on your own volumes.
- Which one do you put clients on?
- Whichever they already run, unless it genuinely cannot answer a question the business needs answered. Migration costs weeks, breaks historical comparability and puts a seam in your data that you will be explaining for a year. The tool is rarely the reason an account underperforms.
Or have us look at the setup you already have
The free audit covers tracking and attribution as well as the accounts. Most of the time the answer is that the MMP is fine and the conversion schema underneath it is not.