Azizyan Levon
DEVELOPMENT OF CROSS-PLATFORM MOBILE APPLICATIONS: A COMPARISON OF FLUTTER, REACT NATIVE, AND KOTLIN MULTIPLATFORM *
Аннотация:
the rising prominence of mobile applications demands cross-platform solutions balancing performance, cost, and scalability. This paper comparatively analyzes Flutter, React Native, and Kotlin Multiplatform regarding their architecture, performance, developer experience, and applications, noting their pros and cons. Through examples and cost aspects, we explore their impact on development time, resources, and maintenance, aiming to inform technical and strategic choices.
Ключевые слова:
Mobile Applications, Cross-Platform, iOS, Android
DOI 10.24412/2712-8849-2025-687-1297-1308
Introduction: In todays software development, creating mobile applications that work across different platforms efficiently is a key goal. Cross-platform development allows writing code once for both iOS and Android, saving time and aiming for a uniform user experience. Solutions like Flutter, React Native, and Kotlin Multiplatform each provide unique advantages for quicker and more cost-effective development. This paper looks into the core ideas and practical worth of these cross-platform tools. It offers a comparison of the most used frameworks, examining their design, how development works, which platforms they support, and their performance. A systematic method helps us see how these tools impact how well developers work and how sustainable projects are in the long run. Furthermore, different industries and parts of the world use these frameworks in varied ways. This shows why its important to figure out what makes them effective—or not—in different development situations. By breaking down these aspects, this study intends to help make smarter choices on both technical and strategic levels.Theoretical Framework.Cross-platform mobile development fundamentally uses software engineering principles like reusability and platform-agnostic design. This aims to make development more efficient without losing performance or user experience across different operating systems. Traditionally, native apps needed separate code for iOS and Android, which cost more, took longer, and required more upkeep. Cross-platform tools offer a different approach by reusing code and unifying development. Key ideas such as modularity, abstraction, and interoperability are crucial for this. Frameworks like Flutter, React Native, and Kotlin Multiplatform let developers write core app logic once and use it on various platforms by handling platform-specific details internally. This follows the "write once, run anywhere" idea, which tries to simplify things, reduce long-term maintenance, and improve overall management of the software. The growth of cross-platform development also shows a shift in what the industry focuses on less on fine-tuning for each platform and more on cost-effective, scalable solutions. As mobile apps become more vital for digital transformation, the core ideas behind cross-platform methods support the increasing need for faster updates, consistent user interfaces, and better use of development resources in todays mobile engineering.Methodology.This study compared Flutter, React Native, and Kotlin Multiplatform using both performance tests and developer feedback. For performance, a simple Tic-Tac-Toe app was built with each, and we measured CPU use, memory, app size, and how fast it started. We used platform-specific tools and averaged results over several tests. [1] We also looked at how easy each framework was to set up and learn, the quality of their documentation, the support from their communities, the number of available tools (libraries), how often they were updated, and how much code could be reused across different platforms. We gathered this information from official guides, developer discussions, and surveys.By combining these performance numbers with developer experiences, this study gives a thorough comparison to help choose the best framework for cross-platform mobile app development. [2]Case Studies with Analysis.This part looks at real examples of Flutter, React Native, and Kotlin Multiplatform in action. These case studies show what each framework can do well and where it might have limits, giving a clearer idea of how they work in different development situations.Flutter.Googles Flutter is popular for creating visually appealing, fast mobile apps. Alibaba Group used it for parts of their Xianyu app, noting quicker development and performance close to native. Flutters way of drawing its own interface helps keep a consistent look across different phones. However, challenges have been observed, particularly when integrating Flutter into existing native infrastructures, as well as the need for teams to gain proficiency in Dart, Flutter’s core programming language [3].React Native.Metas React Native lets developers build mobile apps with JavaScript and React. Facebooks Ads Manager app used it to share code for iOS and Android. Features like hot-reloading and a strong community help speed up development and fix bugs. However, complex animations can sometimes run slower because of how JavaScript talks to the phones system. [4].Kotlin Multiplatform (KMP).JetBrains Kotlin Multiplatform lets developers share code for things like app logic across different platforms but still build separate, native-looking interfaces for each. SpareBank 1, a bank, used it to keep their core app features consistent on both Android and iOS, which cut down on repeated code. However, this approach means developers need to build the user interface specifically for each platform, which can make the development process more involved [5].Comparative Analysis.An examination of these case studies reveals that each cross-platform framework offers distinct advantages aligned with specific development priorities:Flutter stands out for its ability to deliver visually consistent and aesthetically cohesive user interfaces across platforms, supported by rapid development cycles, well-suited for applications where design uniformity and accelerated iteration are critical.React Native offers a balanced compromise between code reusability and near-native performance. Built on JavaScript and backed by a mature ecosystem, it is an attractive choice for teams with existing expertise in web development technologies.Kotlin Multiplatform proves especially valuable in scenarios where sharing core business logic is a primary goal, while maintaining fully native user interfaces. Its seamless integration with platform-specific environments makes it ideal for applications requiring tailored UI on both iOS and Android.Pic. 1. Table An examination of these case studies reveals that each cross-platform framework offers distinct advantages aligned with specific development priorities.Global Adoption and Trends.The global adoption of cross-platform mobile development frameworks reflects marked regional variation, shaped by factors such as prevailing developer skill sets, sector-specific demands, and the underlying technological infrastructure of each region.North America.In the United States, React Native maintains a prominent position, powering more than 14.84% of the top 500 mobile applications [6]. Its sustained popularity is largely attributable to the expansive JavaScript ecosystem and the ease with which web development expertise can be transferred to mobile application development.Europe.Across Europe, developers exhibit a relatively balanced adoption of Flutter and React Native. Flutter is frequently chosen for its ability to deliver expressive user interfaces and strong performance, while React Native remains attractive due to its seamless compatibility with JavaScript-based codebases. Kotlin Multiplatform is also gaining momentum, particularly in countries with robust Kotlin communities such as Germany and the Netherlands, owing to its seamless native interoperability and its capacity to enable shared business logic across platforms [7], [2].Asia.In Asia, Flutter has seen particularly strong adoption, especially in leading technology markets such as China and India. A notable example is Alibaba, which integrated Flutter into parts of its Xianyu application, citing benefits such as accelerated development timelines and performance comparable to native implementations. The region’s mobile-first orientation and growing emphasis on rapid, scalable development practices have further catalyzed Flutter’s widespread use.Pic.2. Table.Global Trends.On a global scale, Flutter and React Native dominate the landscape of cross-platform mobile development frameworks. Findings from the 2023 Stack Overflow Developer Survey show Flutter edging slightly ahead, with 9.21% of professional developers utilizing it compared to React Native’s 9.14% [8]. This slim margin emphasizes how closely matched these two technologies are and their broad acceptance by developers worldwide.Pic. 3. Table Global Trends.Example Calculation: Cost and Time Efficiency in Cross-Platform Development.To better understand the advantages cross-platform frameworks offer in the United States, imagine a hypothetical mobile application designed for both Android and iOS. The traditional method of creating separate native apps for each platform demands managing two independent codebases, which significantly increases both development duration and costs.Assumptions:Each native app requires about 1,200 hours of development time, summing to 2,400 hours for both.Cross-platform approaches like Flutter or Kotlin Multiplatform allow for up to 70% code reuse, which shortens the total time needed.The average hourly wage for a mobile developer in the U.S. is estimated at $61, according to current market data [9].Calculations:Native Development Cost: 2,400 hours × $61/hour = $146,400Cross-Platform Development Time: 2,400 hours × (1 - 0.70) + (2,400 hours × 0.70) = 720 hours (platform-specific) + 1,680 hours (shared) = 2,400 hoursCross-Platform Development Cost: 2,400 hours × $61/hour = $146,400While upfront costs appear similar under these simplified assumptions, cross-platform development’s true strengths emerge during maintenance and future updates. A shared codebase means fixes and improvements only need to be applied once, dramatically reducing ongoing maintenance efforts and expenses over the lifespan of the app. For instance, Forbes has shared more than 80% of their code across platforms using Kotlin Multiplatform, allowing simultaneous feature releases and streamlined maintenance workflows [10]. Likewise, Flutter’s unified codebase approach has been credited with cutting down development timelines and costs, which is particularly advantageous for startups and projects with tight schedules [11].Performance Benchmarks.A fundamental consideration when choosing a mobile development framework is the evaluation of performance characteristics across prominent cross-platform solutions. This section offers a comparative overview of Flutter, React Native, and Kotlin Multiplatform Mobile (KMM), focusing on key performance indicators.Startup Time.Flutter: Utilizing Dart 3.5’s Ahead-of-Time (AOT) compilation alongside improvements in the Skia rendering engine, Flutter delivers application launch speeds that closely approximate those of fully native applications [10].React Native: Generally, experiences longer startup times, primarily due to latency introduced by its JavaScript bridge architecture.Kotlin Multiplatform Mobile: Recent reports from JetBrains’ stabilization release indicate that apps built with Compose Multiplatform exhibit startup times comparable to native counterparts [12].UI Rendering and Frame Rate.Flutter: Consistently achieves smooth animations at a steady 60 frames per second (FPS), enhancing the overall user experience.React Native: Capable of reaching 60 FPS, although real-world performance can fluctuate based on UI complexity and the computational overhead of JavaScript-to-native communication.Kotlin Multiplatform Mobile: Leverages native UI components to attain performance metrics equivalent to those of purely native development environments.Memory Usage.Flutter: Its custom rendering engine may cause slightly increased memory usage compared to native apps, however, continuous optimizations have reduced this gap over time.React Native: Typically incurs higher memory consumption relative to Flutter, mainly owing to its layered architecture and the overhead from the JavaScript bridge.Kotlin Multiplatform Mobile: Through effective use of native components and shared business logic, it achieves efficient memory management [13].CPU Usage.Flutter: Demonstrates proficient CPU utilization, with performance closely aligned to native applications, especially in graphics-intensive rendering tasks [14].React Native: Imposes a heavier CPU load due to the JavaScript bridge, which may hinder performance in CPU-demanding operations.Kotlin Multiplatform Mobile: Offers near-native CPU efficiency by compiling shared code directly into native binaries, minimizing runtime overhead.Battery Consumption.Flutter: Battery usage is observed to be similar to that of React Native, although it may surpass native applications in scenarios involving significant CPU utilization [14].React Native: Typically exhibits higher battery consumption compared to Flutter and native applications, largely due to the persistent communication between JavaScript and native modules.Kotlin Multiplatform Mobile: Presents battery efficiency that is comparable to native applications, resulting from reduced overhead and the employment of native components.While Flutter and React Native speed up development, Kotlin Multiplatform Mobiles performance is closest to native apps. Therefore, selecting a framework should depend on the apps specific performance needs and available resources. Keep in mind that these performance insights reflect data up to 2025, and real-world performance can differ based on app complexity and usage.Conclusion.This study compared Flutter, React Native, and Kotlin Multiplatform, revealing distinct strengths for different needs. Flutter excels in consistent visuals and performance across platforms, ideal for design-focused apps. React Native, leveraging JavaScript, offers rapid development for web-familiar teams. Kotlin Multiplatform shines in sharing core logic while keeping native UIs, good for platform-specific experiences. Performance-wise, Flutter shows strong UI rendering, React Native has improved, and Kotlin Multiplatform offers near-native responsiveness. The best choice depends on project goals, team skills, and long-term maintenance. Flutter suits high-performance, consistent UIs, React Native favors fast development with JavaScript expertise, and Kotlin Multiplatform is key for shared logic with native UIs. Staying updated on these frameworks capabilities is crucial for informed decisions in cross-platform development.
Номер журнала Вестник науки №6 (87) том 1
Ссылка для цитирования:
Azizyan Levon DEVELOPMENT OF CROSS-PLATFORM MOBILE APPLICATIONS: A COMPARISON OF FLUTTER, REACT NATIVE, AND KOTLIN MULTIPLATFORM // Вестник науки №6 (87) том 1. С. 1297 - 1308. 2025 г. ISSN 2712-8849 // Электронный ресурс: https://www.вестник-науки.рф/article/23739 (дата обращения: 09.07.2025 г.)
Вестник науки © 2025. 16+