Autocar vs its rivals

Side-by-side comparison against Autocar's closest competitors — identity, store metrics, ratings & sentiment, and strategic intel.

Autocar
This App
Auto Express
Contender
evo Magazine
Contender
Core Identity
DeveloperHaymarketHachette Filipacchi Media U.S.Carwow Studio LimitedCarwow Studio LimitedAxel Springer España S.A.Magzter Inc.PXRValnet IncThe Drive Media Inc.Active Interest Media, Inc
CategorySportsLifestyleLifestyleLifestyleNewsMagazines & NewspapersNewsNewsSportsMagazines & Newspapers
PlatformiOS, AndroidiOS, AndroidiOS, AndroidiOS, AndroidiOSiOS, AndroidiOS, AndroidiOSiOS, AndroidiOS, Android
Store Metrics
Rating4.6 / 54.5 / 54.4 / 54.7 / 55.0 / 50.0 / 52.3 / 53.4 / 54.0 / 54.3 / 5
Ratings Count442,520163061035404723
PriceFreeFreeFreeFreeFreeFreeFreeFreeFreeFree
Release DateFeb 22, 2012Sep 23, 2010Dec 9, 2012Dec 20, 2010Jun 10, 2012Apr 8, 2014Sep 10, 2010Sep 20, 2010Jun 9, 2011Nov 2, 2022
Last UpdatedFeb 4, 2026May 30, 2025Jan 15, 2025Jul 21, 2025Sep 3, 2025Oct 8, 2024May 4, 2026Oct 2, 2022Jan 29, 2026Jan 21, 2026
Sentiment & Reviews
Sentiment---terrible--negativenegativeterriblemixed
Score---15/100--20/10025/10025/10050/100
Praises---
  • High quality motoring journalism and photography remain the primary reasons for long-term subscriber loyalty
---
  • Comprehensive car database and news coverage provided high value for automotive enthusiasts
  • High quality outdoor writing and photography keep long-term readers engaged with the content
  • Technical depth of project plans
Complaints---
  • Frequent application crashes and launch failures prevent access to paid content across multiple mobile devices
  • Digital edition format changes to static scans make reading articles difficult on mobile screen sizes
--
  • Mobile interface friction
  • Application fails to launch and remains stuck on the startup screen post-update
  • Subscription access failures prevent users from reading issues they have already paid for
  • Application crashes and download failures block access to new and archived magazine issues
  • Android instability and performance issues
Requests---
  • Return to interactive digital layouts instead of static scanned pages for better mobile readability
---
  • Restore technical specifications and trim data to maintain parity with previous versions
  • Integration of print subscriptions to allow free digital access for loyal magazine readers
-
Strategic Intel
Strengths
  • Editorial authority built on definitive comparison tests
  • Cross-platform purchase recovery via Pocketmags sync
  • Editorial authority across performance reporting sustains brand equity
  • Timed-preview model lowers the barrier for initial content discovery
  • Editorial authority in UK-specific car group tests
  • Proprietary future-model renders drive enthusiast retention
  • Expert editorial standards sustain long-term subscriber loyalty [Editorial Quality]
  • Track day discounts provide tangible B2B-linked value [Subscriber Perks]
  • Rigorous editorial content establishes high authority in the Spanish automotive market
  • Pocketmags account integration provides consistent cross-platform access
  • Irreverent editorial voice differentiates from corporate auto journalism
  • Niche focus builds loyalty among enthusiast readers
  • Autojunk community platform creates unique content loop
  • Established editorial brand authority in Dutch market
  • BuzzScore system establishes editorial authority
  • Broad manufacturer database captures search traffic
  • 128-year editorial authority sustains brand trust
  • Multimedia integration increases session duration
  • Affiliate gear reviews monetize editorial expertise
  • Woodsmith Unlimited integration provides a deep library of cross-platform content as a retention mechanism.
Weaknesses
  • Static reading experience lacks interactive elements
  • High friction for new users compared to web-native news apps
  • 2.98 rating on Android indicates significant platform-specific stability issues
  • Lack of interactive community features limits daily active usage
  • Premium tier at £69.99/year above category median
  • Lack of interactive consumer decision tools
  • 2.0★ rating on Android indicates severe stability gaps [Android Performance]
  • Static scanned page format degrades readability on mobile screens [UX Design]
  • Subscription model lacks a free-tier conversion funnel
  • Static reading experience lacks interactive social features
  • Static reading experience lacks interactive ownership tools
  • No offline reading support identified in feature set
  • 2.33★ rating indicates severe mobile usability friction
  • Lack of feature updates in the latest release
  • App launch failure on startup
  • Removal of technical trim data
  • Lack of tablet landscape support
  • 3.66 Android rating indicates critical stability issues
  • Subscription authentication failures block paid access
  • Lack of responsive customer support drives churn
  • 1.5-star rating on Android indicates critical performance regressions compared to the iOS build.
  • Static magazine format lacks the interactive utility tools found in competitor apps.
Pricingsubscriptionsubscriptionsubscriptionsubscriptionsubscriptionsubscriptionfreefreefreesubscription
MomentumMaintenanceZombieZombieMaintenanceZombieMaintenanceMaintenanceZombieMaintenanceMaintenance
Update Cadence2 versions, ~75d avg2 versions, ~235d avg2 versions, 2 majors/6mo, ~27d avg2 versions, 1 majors/6mo, ~5d avg1 versions2 versions, ~488d avg2 versions, 2 majors/6mo, ~3d avg1 versions2 versions, 2 majors/6mo, ~0d avg5 versions, ~115d avg

Compare Autocar head-to-head

Disclosure: Independent intel to help mobile builders succeed.

AI-powered analysis with editorial review, built from publicly available sources. Marlvel.ai is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Autocar, its developer, the app publisher, Apple, or Google Play. All trademarks, logos, and screenshots referenced remain the property of their respective owners.

Data licensed under CC-BY-NC 4.0