ConsultMyApp review
Shortlist-ready for Mobile / App Marketing, with the caveats below.
A lifecycle-oriented app marketing agency spanning visibility, acquisition, retention, and revenue, with major-brand work and recent industry recognition but thinner public case detail than the leaders.
No published price we can link to. We do not estimate one — ask on the call, and see the pricing-transparency line in the scores below.
How it scored
Every dimension is scored against this discipline’s published rubric. Open one to see the claim it was scored on, what the rubric measures there and how much it weighs, and where the evidence came from.
How we scored this
We read the agency’s public record first-hand — its site, pricing, case studies and independent reviews — and score what is checkable: what is published, not how it is phrased. There is no keyword counting or sentiment scoring. The label is a judgment on those facts, which is why each dimension shows the fact that decided it, the band it was judged against, and the sources — so you can check the call, and tell us if you think it is wrong. The full method, and who pays, is on how we vet.
App Store Optimization depthStrong
Strong — 4 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 18% of the total score.
Benchmark — across the 13 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Excellent 8 · Strong 4 · Adequate 1. The typical agency here scores Excellent, and 8 of them score higher than this one.
What this dimension measures: Combines keyword, metadata, localization, creative-page testing, ratings/reviews, custom product pages, and conversion measurement across Apple and Google.
Scores high — Measured install/conversion lift scores 4-5.
What we found — ASO is a central, award-recognized capability.
Evidence: verified — checked against a named source you can open; the links under Sources below are where to check it yourself.
Paid user-acquisition depthStrong
Strong — 4 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 17% of the total score.
Benchmark — across the 13 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Excellent 6 · Strong 4 · Adequate 1 · Weak 2. The typical agency here scores Strong, and 6 of them score higher than this one.
What this dimension measures: Deep Apple Search Ads and relevant mobile-network execution with cohort economics and creative iteration.
Scores low — Quality/LTV-led acquisition scores 4-5; cheapest-install optimization scores 1-2.
What we found — Acquisition and revenue growth are part of the full lifecycle offer.
On the record — “ConsultMyApp says its services cover the full mobile user lifecycle from visibility and acquisition through retention and revenue.” consultmyapp.com ↗
LTV — lifetime value: the revenue a customer generates over the whole relationship, judged against what they cost to acquire.
lifecycle — lifecycle marketing: the automated email and SMS journey across a customer’s relationship — welcome, abandoned cart, post-purchase, win-back.
Evidence: vendor stated — the agency’s own claim, recorded as theirs rather than ours.
Privacy-safe measurement and MMP fluencyStrong
Strong — 4 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 16% of the total score.
Benchmark — across the 13 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Excellent 2 · Strong 5 · Adequate 5 · Weak 1. The typical agency here scores Strong, and 2 of them score higher than this one.
Scores high — Strong command of AppsFlyer/Adjust/Branch, ATT, SKAdNetwork, consent, deep links, incrementality, cohort LTV, and data QA scores 4-5.
Scores low — Platform dashboards alone score 1-2.
What we found — Enterprise app work supports capability; exact public implementation detail is sparse. That is the high band above, which is why it scored Strong.
LTV — lifetime value: the revenue a customer generates over the whole relationship, judged against what they cost to acquire.
Evidence: vendor stated — the agency’s own claim, recorded as theirs rather than ours.
Activation, retention and lifecycleExcellent
Excellent — 5 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 13% of the total score.
Benchmark — across the 13 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Excellent 5 · Strong 3 · Adequate 2 · Weak 3. The typical agency here scores Strong, and none scores higher than this one.
What this dimension measures: Connects acquisition to onboarding, activation, push, in-app, email/SMS, churn, subscriptions, and LTV.
Scores low — Retained-user outcomes score 4-5; install-only scope scores 1-2.
What we found — The firm explicitly positions around the complete app user lifecycle and sustainable growth.
lifecycle — lifecycle marketing: the automated email and SMS journey across a customer’s relationship — welcome, abandoned cart, post-purchase, win-back.
churn — the rate at which customers cancel.
LTV — lifetime value: the revenue a customer generates over the whole relationship, judged against what they cost to acquire.
Evidence: verified — checked against a named source you can open; the links under Sources below are where to check it yourself.
Mobile creative testingStrong
Strong — 4 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 12% of the total score.
Benchmark — across the 13 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Excellent 6 · Strong 5 · Adequate 1 · Weak 1. The typical agency here scores Strong, and 6 of them score higher than this one.
What this dimension measures: Produces and iterates store and paid creative by platform, audience, and market with a structured test cadence.
Scores low — High-volume native testing scores 4-5; static resizes score 1-2.
What we found — App-store and campaign growth imply creative work, but public experiment detail is limited.
Evidence: vendor stated — the agency’s own claim, recorded as theirs rather than ours.
App client evidence and outcomesStrong
Strong — 4 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 11% of the total score.
Benchmark — across the 13 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Excellent 7 · Strong 5 · Adequate 1. The typical agency here scores Excellent, and 7 of them score higher than this one.
Scores high — Named current apps plus verified reviews and quantified visibility, conversion, CAC, retention, or LTV results score 4-5.
Scores low — Logo walls and install counts without quality score 1-2.
What we found — Macy's and MONOPOLY GO! are named; awards provide additional market recognition. That is the high band above, which is why it scored Strong.
On the record — “The company names Macy's and MONOPOLY GO! and cites recent ASO and app-marketing awards.” consultmyapp.com ↗
CAC — customer acquisition cost: total sales and marketing spend divided by customers won — the number that says whether growth is affordable.
LTV — lifetime value: the revenue a customer generates over the whole relationship, judged against what they cost to acquire.
Evidence: verified — checked against a named source you can open; the links under Sources below are where to check it yourself.
Fraud, compliance and account safetyStrong
Strong — 4 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 7% of the total score.
Benchmark — across the 13 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Strong 7 · Adequate 5 · Weak 1. The typical agency here scores Strong, and none scores higher than this one.
What this dimension measures: Addresses mobile ad fraud, brand safety, COPPA/regulated categories, permissions, review policy, and client account ownership.
Scores high — Documented controls score 4-5.
What we found — Major-brand work suggests mature controls, which still need direct verification.
Evidence: inferred — our reading of indirect evidence, not a documented fact.
Pricing, contract and data ownershipNot disclosed
Not disclosed — 2 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). Nothing was published about this, so it scores at the bottom of the scale — that is a finding about what the agency discloses, not about the quality of its work. This dimension carries 6% of the total score.
Benchmark — across the 13 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Excellent 1 · Strong 2 · Adequate 4 · Weak 6. The typical agency here scores Adequate, and 7 of them score higher than this one.
Scores high — Clear fees, media markups, minimums, exits, creative rights, MMP/data access, and client-owned ad/store accounts score 4-5.
Scores low — Opaque percentage pricing or trapped data scores 1-2.
What we found — No public fee, term, or data-ownership standard was located. That is what the low band describes, and nothing published resolves it.
Evidence: unknown
Stronger here: App Radar scores Excellent on the same dimension.
Verdict
ConsultMyApp clears the threshold as a credible full-lifecycle mobile specialist. Its offer explicitly covers gaining and retaining users, and the public client roster includes Macy's and MONOPOLY GO!, with recent ASO and app-marketing awards.
The weakness is evidence granularity: the reviewed homepage provides less methodological and outcome detail than Phiture, Yodel, or Moburst. Ask for comparable case readouts, MMP and SKAN architecture, experiment logs, and client-owned data access.
What you can do next
Koolav can make the introduction and handle the back-and-forth, or you can go straight to the agency.
This agency has not published a paid trial. What a paid trial is.
What we verified
Each claim below was checked against a named source, last on 2026-07-24. Follow any of them and check for yourself — that is the point of publishing them.
- ConsultMyApp says its services cover the full mobile user lifecycle from visibility and acquisition through retention and revenue. consultmyapp.com ↗
- The company names Macy's and MONOPOLY GO! and cites recent ASO and app-marketing awards. consultmyapp.com ↗
What other platforms say
Credible lifecycle specialization with a thinner public evidence trail than the top-ranked firms.
These are other platforms' numbers, not ours. We report them because they are part of the picture, and we do not average them into our score — our score comes from the published rubric above.
Red flags
- Public outcome detail is limited
- Pricing is opaque
What we could not verify
- Comparable quantified case outcomes
- MMP, SKAN, fraud, pricing, and data-ownership terms
Sources
Others we evaluated in Mobile / App Marketing
Same rubric, same evaluator, same date range — so these are directly comparable to the verdict above.
See all 14 Mobile / App Marketing agencies we evaluated →
Think this is wrong?
If anything on this page is wrong or out of date, send us the correction and we will re-read the site.
Evidence moves a verdict. Money never does — no agency pays us for a listing, a placement, or a re-review. Whatever we conclude we publish, including that the verdict stands.