Longer-trial conversion is a test idea, not a free uplift

RevenueCat reports trial-to-paid conversion of 42.5% for trials of at least 17 days against 25.5% for short trials. It is an observed segment comparison, not a guaranteed gain from lengthening a trial. Report.

Do not start the clock in two places

A trial-start denominator differs from an install denominator. A game can increase conversion among those who start a trial while making fewer installers willing to begin one. Both stages matter when the acquisition budget is paid per install or impression.

Our recommendation is to keep a funnel from acquired user to trial start, first payment, refund and retained value. Allow each cohort enough time to reach the endpoint before comparing it with a mature cohort. Otherwise a longer offer can look weak simply because its payment opportunity has not arrived.

Design the local experiment around a decision

Event-based retention documentation offers a useful reminder to state the start and return actions when investigating post-trial behaviour. Decide whether the question is payment conversion, continued play, or net value after a chosen horizon.

If a studio tests trial duration, keep the proposed conditions and measurement rules explicit. The external report may justify investigating a longer experience window, but it cannot identify the best duration for an individual game. The evidence card preserves the reported comparison and the causal limit in the same object, so the qualification survives when the statistic leaves the article.

Inspect the evidence

Download the source-population and comparability card. The extraction separates documented facts from our analysis and unknowns.

Further reading in the existing archive: ROAS targets versus payback windows; D7 ROAS targets punish long-retention games. These links provide background; this check does not independently verify their full contents.