# What Share Of Companies Run A Soft Paywall Variant?

Source: Lazyweb Research
Published: 2026-07-07
Sample size: n=252
Tags: paywall, monetization, ux-patterns, mobile, experiments
HTML: https://www.lazyweb.com/research/what-share-of-companies-run-a-soft-paywall-variant
Markdown: https://www.lazyweb.com/research/what-share-of-companies-run-a-soft-paywall-variant.md

**Answer.** Of 252 companies with paywall CTA data tracked by Lazyweb Research, 145 (57.5%) show a visible exit on at least one captured paywall — even though only 26.2% of individual screens are soft [1][2]. Most companies run at least one soft variant while defaulting most screens to hard gates [1]. The screen-level and company-level rates diverge because soft exits cluster in a subset of each app's paywalls [1].

> 57.5% of companies (145 of 252) ship at least one soft paywall, versus only 26.2% of individual screens — Lazyweb Research, July 2026.

## Screens are hard, companies are mixed

At the screen level, 710 of 2,708 paywalls (26.2%) are soft [2]. At the company level, 145 of 252 companies (57.5%) run at least one soft paywall somewhere [1]. The gap tells you soft exits are not evenly spread — a company will hard-gate most placements and soften a few (for example, an onboarding paywall versus a mid-session upsell).

## How to apply it

The company-level number is the honest competitive benchmark: a majority of tracked apps have decided that at least one surface deserves a visible exit [1]. If your app hard-gates everywhere, you are in the minority of companies (about 42%), even though hard is the majority of screens [1][2]. Use surface, not app, as the unit of decision — pick which placements get an exit rather than choosing one policy app-wide.

## Caveats

Both rates are lower bounds: undetected close controls and unlabeled CTAs would raise them [1]. Company coverage varies — some apps have many captured screens and some just a few, so 'has at least one soft variant' is easier to satisfy for heavily captured apps [1]. This is what-shipped evidence, not lift [1].

## The numbers

| Stat | Computed from |
| --- | --- |
| 145 of 252 companies (57.5%) have a visible exit somewhere | companies_with_any_visible_exit: 145/252 = 57.5% |
| 710 of 2,708 screens (26.2%) are soft | screens_with_any_visible_exit: 710/2,708 = 26.2% |

## Methodology

Company-level rate over 252 companies; a company is soft if any of its captured paywalls shows a visible exit. Screen-level rate over 2,708 screens. Both are extraction-based lower bounds. July 2026.

## Sources & citations

- [1] Lazyweb Research analysis of 252 companies with paywall CTA data (mobile app corpus), July 2026. Company counts as soft if any captured paywall shows a visible exit; a lower bound.
- [2] Lazyweb Research analysis of 2,708 paywall screens (mobile app corpus, 252 companies), July 2026. Screen-level visible-exit rate.

## Related questions

- [What Percent Of Paywalls Have A Visible Dismiss Option?](https://www.lazyweb.com/research/what-percent-of-paywalls-have-a-visible-dismiss-option)
- [Hard Vs Soft Paywall: How Common Is Each?](https://www.lazyweb.com/research/hard-vs-soft-paywall-how-common-is-each)
- [Hard Vs Soft Paywall: Do Subscription And Advertising Apps Differ?](https://www.lazyweb.com/research/hard-vs-soft-paywall-subscription-vs-advertising-apps)