Hire by Technology
SERVICES
Contents
Share this article
Key Takeaways
Native app development means building an app using the language and tools built specifically for one platform, Swift or Objective-C for iOS, Kotlin or Java for Android, rather than a single shared codebase that runs everywhere.
While there are some advantages, it's a lot more work than the cross-platform alternative.
However, for a real share of products, particularly ones handling payments, biometrics, or anything performance-sensitive, it's still the right call.
Let’s look at everything you need to know so you can decide between native and cross-platform development for your project, and so you can choose the right tools and frameworks to code efficiently.
To connect with expert developers through IT staff augmentation, with experience creating and maintaining apps in heavily regulated niches like fintech, view capabilities.
Native apps don't run in a browser and aren't a website wrapped in an app shell.
Instead, these apps are downloaded from a platform-specific store, like Apple's App Store or the Google Play Store, and built using each platform's own SDK.
iOS apps are built in Swift or Objective-C using Xcode, Android apps in Kotlin or Java using Android Studio.
Since there's no translation layer between the app and the operating system, native apps get direct, immediate access to whatever the device can do. In terms of hardware, that means they can use the camera, GPS, biometric sensors, NFC, and push notifications without waiting on a plugin.
This is different from a cross-platform or hybrid app, which uses one shared codebase, commonly React Native, Flutter, or a web-technology wrapper, to target both platforms at once.
We’ve seen firsthand how cross-platform apps have improved over the past several years, closing most of the practical performance gap for typical business apps.
Instead of just asking if you should use native or cross-platform development, think about which specific features your app needs that actually require going native.
| Native | Cross-Platform | |
| Languages | Swift/Objective-C (iOS), Kotlin/Java (Android) | JavaScript/TypeScript (React Native), Dart (Flutter) |
| Codebases | Separate for each platform | Single shared codebase |
| Performance | Best possible, direct hardware access | Very good for most apps, some overhead remains |
| Development cost | Higher, two codebases to build and maintain | Lower, one codebase for both platforms |
| Time to market | Slower, parallel or sequential builds | Faster, ship both platforms at once |
| Best fit | Performance-critical, hardware-heavy, complex animation | Most business apps, content apps, MVPs |
As we have already mentioned, native apps talk to the operating system directly, which matters most for graphics-heavy apps, games, and anything doing real-time processing.
Cross-platform frameworks have gotten a lot better, narrowing this gap significantly, but a small overhead remains.
It only really matters in complex animations and heavy computational work.
Face ID, fingerprint authentication, the device keychain for secure credential storage, and NFC for contactless payments are all easiest to implement correctly and hardest to get subtly wrong natively, making that the natural choice for these features regardless of performance.
For a fintech app specifically, this is usually the deciding factor on its own.
Building natively means you are going to build twice, once for iOS and once for Android.
Naturally, this generally costs more and takes longer than a single cross-platform codebase.
That said, apps that lean heavily on platform-specific features often end up writing so much native-bridge code in a cross-platform framework anyway that the cost gap narrows considerably.
Native apps tend to have an easier time with app store review, since they can be built with compliance in mind from the start.
Apps relying heavily on web views or unusual bridging layers occasionally run into more scrutiny.
From what we have seen, native is the clearer choice when an app needs any of the following: deep biometric integration for authentication or payments, complex or high-frame-rate animation, heavy use of device-specific hardware (advanced camera features, AR, specific sensors), or the absolute best possible performance for a demanding, long-session-time app.
In almost every other instance, we would recommend cross-platform apps, or a hybrid option where most of the features are cross-platform.
These are usually the better call for content-driven apps, most internal business tools, MVPs that need to validate a market quickly, and teams with a small budget who need both platforms live at once rather than one platform first.
For fintech specifically, this calculus leans further toward native, or at minimum a native core with cross-platform for the rest.
As we mentioned, biometric authentication for login and transaction approval, the device keychain for storing credentials securely, and NFC for tap-to-pay all work more reliably and are easier to implement correctly when built natively.
If this is too expensive for your company, consider that a significant share of fintech users worldwide access financial products primarily through Android devices. It is likely the best place to start.
If the app in question handles money, a few things are worth deciding before writing any code, not after:
At Trio, we place native iOS and Android engineers with direct fintech production experience to help you mitigate risk and ensure compliance.
Established, high-stakes apps provide a good baseline.
Ride-sharing apps like Uber are built natively (Java/Kotlin on Android, Swift/Objective-C on iOS) specifically because real-time location tracking, mapping, and payment processing all benefit from direct hardware access and consistent performance under real-world network conditions.
Messaging platforms like Slack combine native mobile apps with an Electron-based desktop app, using native specifically where mobile performance and notification reliability matter most, while accepting more overhead on desktop where it matters less.
Delivery and marketplace apps consistently choose native for the same real-time location, payment processing, and messaging between two live parties that the other applications like to use.
For Android: the Android SDK bundled with Android Studio (the official IDE), Kotlin as the modern default language (Java remains fully supported), Android Jetpack for pre-built components, and Firebase for backend services, analytics, and crash reporting.
For iOS: Xcode as the official IDE, Swift as the modern default language (Objective-C remains supported for legacy codebases), the Cocoa Touch UI framework, Swift Playgrounds for learning, and TestFlight for beta distribution. Just keep in mind that iOS development specifically requires a Mac.
For Cross-platform: React Native (JavaScript/TypeScript, backed by Meta, large ecosystem), Flutter (Dart, backed by Google, strong for highly custom UI), and Kotlin Multiplatform, which takes a different approach entirely, sharing business logic across platforms while keeping the actual UI layer fully native on each one.
Shipping a native app is just the start of the process. You then move into maintenance.
Crash reporting and error monitoring, split by operating system version and device type, catch problems before app store reviews do.
We also recommend that you keep an eye on real-user performance metrics such as launch time, UI response time, and data consumption, as these help you predict and improve app store ratings and retention.
Native apps also need platform-specific monitoring, since an iOS crash and an Android crash rarely share a root cause.
All of this requires skilled developers who understand not just how to build a great application, but all the unique user and compliance expectations of a specific niche.
We can connect you with those people in as little as 3-5 days, placing even senior fintech specialists for $40-$90 per hour.
Expertise
Subscribe to our newsletter
Related
Content
Continue Reading
