Skip to content

What are the most universal screens across mobile apps — and which are rare?

  • By Ali Abouelatta
  • n = 809
  • Published
  • Updated
  • 2 min read
  • ux-patterns · mobile · design · saas · monetization

Short answer

Settings is the most universal non-home screen, in 71.4% of tracked apps (578 of 809), followed by profile (58.0%) and search (55.6%) source[1]. At the other end, onboarding quizzes (13.3%), streaks (11.6%), and leaderboards (6.8%) are rare, niche patterns number[2]. Use this ladder to judge whether any screen you're debating is expected or optional.

The quotable stat
Settings (71.4%) is the most universal non-home screen; leaderboards (6.8%) the rarest — across ~800 tracked apps, July 2026.

Bar chart · %

% — The prevalence ladder

One block is about 2.6%

Settings
71.4%
Profile / account
58.0%
Search
55.6%
In-flow upsell (upper bound)
46.2%
Empty state
45.7%
Social login
40.7%
Notification primer
39.9%
Paywall
37.7%
Checkout / cart
33.4%
Referral
25.3%
Dark mode
19.0%
Biometric login
16.6%

The prevalence ladder

Ranked prevalence across 809 tracked apps source[1]number[2]:

ScreenApps%
Settings57871.4%
Profile / account46958.0%
Search45055.6%
In-flow upsell (upper bound)37446.2%
Empty state37045.7%
Social login32940.7%
Notification primer32339.9%
Paywall30537.7%
Checkout / cart27033.4%
Referral20525.3%
Dark mode15419.0%
Biometric login13416.6%
Onboarding quiz10813.3%
Rating request10312.7%
Celebration9611.9%
Streaks9411.6%
AI assistant8810.9%
Widget upsell698.5%
Leaderboard556.8%

How to apply it

Use the ladder as a table-stakes-vs-optional test. Anything above ~50% (settings, profile, search) is an expected screen — its absence is a gap to justify. Patterns in the 30-45% band (upsell, empty state, social login, notification primer, paywall, checkout) are common but genuinely optional and category-dependent. Below ~20% (dark mode, biometric, quizzes, streaks, AI, widgets, leaderboards) are differentiators you add on purpose, usually because your vertical rewards them.

Caveats

Every figure is a lower bound on captured screens (median 41/app) source[1]. The in-flow upsell figure (46.2%) is a flagged upper bound because '%upsell%' also matches subscription upsells number[2]. All figures are COUNT(DISTINCT company_name) over 809 apps, deduped; the denominator is never the 62,376-row companies table.

Real in-market screens

Screens from real, in-market apps, tracked by Lazyweb Research.

  • Temu home screen — real in-market example tracked by Lazyweb Research
    Temu1206 × 2622opens the full image
  • Mindllama Account Setup screen — real in-market example tracked by Lazyweb Research
    Mindllama1206 × 2622opens the full image
  • Translate Now home screen — real in-market example tracked by Lazyweb Research
    Translate Now1206 × 2622opens the full image
  • Mimo Account Setup screen — real in-market example tracked by Lazyweb Research
    Mimo1206 × 2622opens the full image

The numbers

#StatComputed from
[1]Settings 71.4% (578), Profile 58.0% (469), Search 55.6% (450)prevalence_settings_screen, prevalence_profile_screen, prevalence_search_screen
[2]Onboarding quiz 13.3% (108), Streaks 11.6% (94), Leaderboard 6.8% (55); in-flow upsell 46.2% (374) upper boundprevalence_onboarding_quiz, prevalence_streaks, prevalence_leaderboard, prevalence_checkout_upsell

Methodology

Universe: 809 apps with >=1 captured screen. Method: COUNT(DISTINCT company_name) per pattern tag family, ranked. July 2026. Caveat: lower bound on capture; in-flow upsell is an upper bound.

Sources

  1. [1]

    Lazyweb Research analysis of 809 mobile apps (809 mobile apps with >=1 captured screen; 751 with tag data; median 41 screens/app), July 2026

    Prevalence = COUNT(DISTINCT company_name) over LLM synonym tags; denominator is 809 tracked apps (reported conservatively over all apps-with-screens, not the 62,376-row companies table). Lower bound: only reflects screens Lazyweb captured (median 41/app).

    Back to text

Source: Lazyweb Research — proprietary analysis of real, in-market app screens. Cite as Lazyweb Research, 2026-07-07.

Explore the evidence