Been tracking monthly churn for our annual plan and the numbers feel off.
Most users who cancel do it right after renewal, so monthly view makes it look like we’re bleeding users when we’re actually pretty stable.
Wondering if annual churn makes more sense here.
Monthly churn isn’t useful for annual subscriptions. It causes confusion during renewals and doesn’t reflect real user stability.
Annual churn beats monthly for yearly subs. Monthly data’s just noise.
Seen this across multiple apps - monthly view makes retention look awful since people cancel in batches around renewal dates. Your actual retention could be fine.
I track both but decide based on annual. Only use monthly to catch sudden drops that need quick action.
Check cohort retention at 6 and 12 months too. Shows you how sticky your product actually is.
You’re right - monthly churn doesn’t tell the real story with annual subs.
Cohort renewal rates are way better for seeing retention patterns. You’ll actually know which user groups stick around.
Sure, monthly churn catches urgent problems, but with annual plans you need to watch actual renewals to see if people are really staying.
Monthly churn misleads for annual subscriptions. It creates noise and can show false spikes. The real issue is that you miss early signs of trouble. Annual churn provides clarity. If your product has a problem, annual metrics won’t reflect it right away. I focus on weekly active users alongside annual churn. A drop in WAU signals an issue immediately, while churn data lags. This approach helps you address problems before they impact renewals.
Annual churn tells the true story not monthly