Nearly all Duolingo lapsers had no paid competitor activity afterward
Share of July 2024–January 2025 Duolingo subscribers with no paid rival-language receipt over the following 18 months
Share with no paid rival-language receipt
Source: YipitData U.S. e-receipt panel. Lapsed Duolingo subscribers n=5,688; retained subscribers n=2,945. All were established, active panelists. The 18-month outcome window reduces misclassification from annual billing gaps.
Chart data
| Series | Share with no paid rival-language receipt |
|---|---|
| Lapsed Duolingo subscribers | 97.8% |
| Retained Duolingo subscribers | 96.8% |
Did Duolingo lapsers adopt a new paid competitor?
Only 1.5% of lapsers adopted a competitor they had not paid before, compared with 2.3% of retained Duolingo subscribers. The 0.8-point difference was statistically reliable and ran opposite to a switching pattern. This does not capture free language tools, informal study, or general-purpose AI used for practice.
How often did subscribers pay for Duolingo and another language app?
Among 26,742 Duolingo paid subscribers observed from August 2025–July 2026, 1.9% also paid at least one measured competitor. By comparison, 16.4% of 3,050 paid competitor users also paid Duolingo. These are observed receipt relationships rather than claims about total market share or market power.
Assumptions & Methodologies
We analyzed established U.S. e-receipt panelists who paid Super Duolingo, Duolingo Max, Duolingo Plus, or a Duolingo Family Plan from July 2024–January 2025. Lapsers (n=5,688) had no paid Duolingo receipt in the following 18 months through July 2026; retained subscribers (n=2,945) paid in 2026. All remained panel-active. Competitors included Babbel, Rosetta Stone, Pimsleur, Busuu, Memrise, LingQ, Lingoda, iTalki, Preply, and Mango Languages. The long window addresses annual billing gaps. Masked receipts may undercount services; free tools, informal study, and some tutoring are unobserved.