What percent of mobile apps show an in-app rating-request screen?
- By Ali Abouelatta
- n = 809
- Published
- Updated
- 2 min read
- retention · notifications · ux-patterns · mobile · experiments
Short answer
12.7% of tracked apps (103 of 809) show an in-app rating-request screen source[1]. A stricter canonical count puts dedicated app-rating screens at just 22 apps number[2], so somewhere between ~3% and ~13% of tracked apps have a captured rating prompt. Either way it's a minority pattern, and it's notably absent in Shopping (0 of 44) and Medical (0 of 20) number[3].
103 of ~800 tracked apps (12.7%) show a rating-request screen; the strict canonical count is 22 apps — Lazyweb Research, July 2026.
Bar chart · Apps w/ rating
Apps w/ rating — The finding
One block is about 0.4 Apps w/ rating
- Health & Fitness
- 10
- Travel
- 6
- Productivity
- 6
- Finance
- 5
- News
- 5
- Shopping
- 0
- Medical
- 0
The finding
The broad tag match finds rating prompts in 103 apps (12.7%), while the stricter 'app rating' canonical category appears in just 22 apps source[1]number[2]. By vertical, numerators are small and some are zero number[3]:
| Vertical | Apps w/ rating | Denom |
|---|---|---|
| Health & Fitness | 10 | 56 |
| Travel | 6 | 41 |
| Productivity | 6 | 64 |
| Finance | 5 | 47 |
| News | 5 | 46 |
| Shopping | 0 | 44 |
| Medical | 0 | 20 |
How to apply it
Rating prompts are a minority surface, and where they appear they cluster in utilities, wellness, travel, and news (named examples: AccuWeather, Calm, Expedia, CBS News) source[1]. The zeroes in Shopping and Medical are informative: commerce and health apps often skip the prompt, likely to avoid interrupting a purchase or a sensitive moment. Time the prompt after a clear success (a completed workout, a delivered order) rather than on launch, and gate the OS review sheet behind a soft in-app ask.
Caveats
Two figures bracket the truth: 12.7% (broad tags, 103 apps) and 22 apps (strict canonical) source[1]number[2]. Per-vertical numerators are tiny (0-10), so publish absolute counts and avoid headline percentages below 8 apps number[3]. Rating prompts are transient and easily missed in capture — a lower bound.
Real in-market screens
Screens from real, in-market apps, tracked by Lazyweb Research.
Adidas1290 × 2796opens the full image 
Opal602 × 1308opens the full image 
Ig1206 × 2622opens the full image 
Twitter1206 × 2622opens the full image
The numbers
| # | Stat | Computed from |
|---|---|---|
| [1] | 12.7% (103 of 809) | prevalence_rating_request: 103/809 |
| [2] | 22 apps with app-rating canonical screen | canonical_category_census.app_rating_screens (22) |
| [3] | Health & Fitness 10/56, Shopping 0/44, Medical 0/20 | rating_request_by_category |
Methodology
Universe: 809 apps with >=1 captured screen. Method: COUNT(DISTINCT company_name) matching rating tags (broad) plus strict canonical app-rating count; per-vertical splits n>=20. July 2026. Caveat: transient, capture-limited; small numerators.
Sources
- [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).
Source: Lazyweb Research — proprietary analysis of real, in-market app screens. Cite as Lazyweb Research, 2026-07-07.