Should My App Follow Trends or Create Its Own Path?

Have you ever watched a competitor's app add a feature and immediately thought "we need that too"? I've seen this happen dozens of times, and its usually the start of a very expensive mistake. The thing is, following trends feels safe—if everyone else is doing it, surely it must work, right? But in my years building apps for everyone from healthcare startups to major fintech companies, I've learned that blindly chasing trends is one of the fastest ways to waste your budget and confuse your users. At the same time, ignoring everything happening in your market and trying to reinvent the wheel? That's just as dangerous.

This question comes up in almost every project I work on. A client will see dark mode everywhere and ask if their medical appointment app needs it. Or they'll notice a competitor added gamification and suddenly want badges and leaderboards in their banking app. The problem isn't that these features are bad—its that they're making decisions based on what's trendy rather than what their actual users need. I once worked with an e-commerce client who spent £40,000 adding AR try-on features because their competitor had it, only to discover their customers were still struggling with basic checkout issues that were killing conversions.

The best apps don't follow trends or ignore them—they understand which trends solve real problems for their specific users and which ones are just noise.

So how do you figure out when to jump on something new and when to stay focused on your own path? That's exactly what we're going to explore. Because the answer isn't as simple as "be different" or "do what works"—its about understanding your market, knowing your users better than anyone else, and making strategic decisions that align with where you're actually trying to go. And yeah, that's harder than it sounds, but its the difference between apps that stick around and apps that get forgotten in three months.

Understanding What Trends Actually Mean for Your App

The thing about trends is they're not all created equal, right? I mean, some trends are genuine shifts in how people use their phones—like the move from text-based interfaces to voice commands or the explosion of short-form video. Those aren't fads, they're fundamental changes in user behaviour that you'd be mad to ignore. But then you've got trends that are just... noise. Remember when every app suddenly needed a chatbot? Half of them were utterly useless because nobody stopped to ask whether their users actually needed one.

When I'm evaluating a trend for a client's app, I look at three things; user demand (are people actually asking for this?), technical maturity (is the tech ready or will we be fighting bugs?), and longevity (will this still matter in 18 months?). I worked on a fintech app where the client was desperate to add cryptocurrency features because "everyone's doing it"—but their user base was conservative investors in their 50s and 60s who frankly didn't care. We pushed back, focused on improving their pension tracking instead, and user engagement went up 40%. Sometimes saying no to a trend is the smartest thing you can do.

Here's what really matters when you're looking at trends:

• Does it solve a real problem for your specific users, not just users in general?
• Can you implement it properly with your budget and timeline, or will it be half-baked?
• Will it distract from your core functionality that people already love?
• Is your competition doing it well, or are they all fumbling around trying to figure it out too?

The Difference Between Trends and Standards

One mistake I see constantly is people confusing trends with industry standards. Dark mode? Thats a standard now, not a trend—users expect it. Biometric login? Standard. But adding AR features to your recipe app just because Apple released ARKit... thats chasing trends without thinking it through. I built an e-commerce app where the client wanted AR try-on features for jewellery, which actually made sense because it solved the problem of "will this look good on me?" But another client wanted AR in their project management app and I honestly couldn't figure out why—neither could their users when we tested it. This is why keeping your app design fresh should be about meeting user needs, not following every trend blindly.

Reading the Market Without Losing Yourself

The best approach I've found is to stay informed about whats happening in the mobile world but filter everything through your app's specific purpose. When we were developing a healthcare app for patient monitoring, everyone was talking about gamification. Sure, we added some elements—streak tracking for medication adherence, small rewards for hitting health goals—but we didn't turn serious health management into a game because that would've undermined the apps credibility. You need to understand the trend well enough to extract the useful bits and leave the rest behind. Its like... you wouldn't install a sports car engine in a delivery van just because fast cars are popular, would you? Different tools for different jobs.

The Real Cost of Following Every Trend

Here's what nobody tells you about chasing trends—it gets bloody expensive, and fast. I'm not just talking about the development costs (though those are significant), I'm talking about the hidden costs that can quietly drain your resources and derail your entire product strategy.

I worked with a fintech client who wanted to add augmented reality features to their banking app because everyone was talking about AR at the time. The implementation cost them around £45,000 and took three months of development time. You know what happened? Less than 2% of their users ever engaged with it. The real kicker? While we were building that AR feature, two competitors launched peer-to-peer payment features that actually addressed user pain points, and my client lost market share.

Every trend you chase diverts resources from your core product. Your development team has a finite capacity—roughly 40-60 hours per week per developer if you're lucky. When you're building a trending feature, you're not fixing bugs, improving performance, or building features your users actually need. Its a trade-off that many businesses don't properly account for until its too late.

The Technical Debt Problem

Trend-based features often get bolted onto existing architecture without proper planning; this creates technical debt that compounds over time. I've seen apps where we had to essentially rebuild entire sections because rushed trend features were implemented poorly. One e-commerce client ended up spending more money removing and refactoring a chatbot feature than they did building it in the first place.

User Experience Fragmentation

Each trend you follow dilutes your apps focus. Users come to your app expecting it to solve a specific problem, but if you're constantly adding unrelated features to stay current, you create confusion. A healthcare app we worked on started adding social networking features because "health community apps" were trending. Their core users—busy professionals tracking chronic conditions—found the app harder to navigate and their retention dropped by 18% over six months.

Before implementing any trending feature, calculate the opportunity cost. Ask yourself: what could we build instead with these same resources that would directly serve our core value proposition? If the answer is more valuable than the trend, skip it.

The maintenance burden is another cost people underestimate. That AI-powered recommendation engine you built last year? It needs updating as platforms change, models improve, and user behaviour shifts. I've got clients still maintaining features from three years ago that generate minimal engagement but require ongoing technical support. It adds up quickly when you're supporting five or six trend-driven features that never quite delivered on their promise. This is where understanding how to plan for technology changes becomes crucial for long-term sustainability.

When Copying Works (And When It Doesn't)

I'll be honest with you—there's nothing wrong with copying certain elements from successful apps. In fact, I'd argue its one of the smartest things you can do in some cases. When we built a fitness tracking app a few years back, we absolutely copied the swipe-to-complete gesture from apps like Tinder and others because users already understood it. They didn't need to learn a new interaction pattern, which meant better retention right from the start. That's smart copying.

But here's where it gets tricky. I've seen plenty of apps fail because they copied the wrong things. One e-commerce client wanted to replicate every feature from a competitor's app, including a complex social sharing system that their users simply didn't care about. We spent three months building it. Know what happened? Less than 2% of users ever touched it. That's the kind of copying that wastes money and time.

What You Should Copy

The stuff worth copying falls into clear categories, and I've learned this through watching what actually works:

• Established UI patterns like hamburger menus or bottom navigation bars—users expect these
• Proven onboarding flows that reduce drop-off rates (we've seen these improve retention by 30-40%)
• Standard payment processes because people dont want surprises when entering card details
• Common gesture controls that iOS and Android users already know
• Security features like biometric login—these build trust immediately

What You Shouldn't Copy

The dangerous territory is copying your competitor's core value proposition or their unique features without understanding why they work. A healthcare app we worked on wanted to copy a symptom checker from a much larger competitor, but they didn't have the medical database or AI infrastructure to make it accurate. We talked them out of it—better to have five features that work brilliantly than ten that feel half-baked. Your differentiation should come from solving problems in ways that suit your specific users, not from replicating someone else's entire product strategy.

Building Something Different That People Actually Want

Here's what I've learned from building apps that actually stand out—differentiation only matters if people understand why they should care. I mean, you can build the most unique app in the world, but if it solves a problem nobody has or solves it in a way thats confusing, you've just created an expensive experiment. The sweet spot is finding a genuine need that existing apps aren't addressing properly, then building your solution in a way that feels obvious once people see it.

I worked on a healthcare app where the client wanted to add every feature under the sun to differentiate from competitors. But here's the thing—we did user research and found that people were overwhelmed by existing health apps because they tried to do too much. So we stripped it back. Way back. We focused on one thing: medication reminders with smart timing based on meal patterns. Simple, right? But nobody else was doing it that way, and it actually solved a real problem for people managing multiple medications. The app retention rate hit 67% after three months, which is honestly pretty solid for healthcare. When creating something unique, it's crucial to align all stakeholders on what features matter most before development begins.

True differentiation comes from understanding what your users struggle with and removing those obstacles, not from adding features nobody asked for.

The tricky bit is validating your different idea before you spend months building it. I always push clients to talk to potential users first—and I mean really talk to them, not just send out surveys. Ask them what they're currently using and where it falls short. Their complaints about existing solutions? That's your roadmap for being different. And if you cant find consistent patterns in what people struggle with, that's a red flag that maybe your unique idea isnt solving a real problem after all.

Finding the Balance Between Safe and Risky

This is where most app projects either find their stride or completely fall apart, honestly. I've watched brilliant ideas get watered down into mediocrity because clients got scared at the last minute; and I've seen overly ambitious concepts crash and burn because nobody wanted to admit the idea was too far ahead of its time. The sweet spot sits somewhere in the middle, but finding it requires you to be brutally honest about what you're capable of delivering.

Here's what I do with my own projects—I use what I call the 70/30 rule. About 70% of your app should feel familiar and comfortable to users, whilst the remaining 30% can push boundaries and try something different. I worked on a healthcare booking app where we kept the appointment scheduling interface completely standard (everyone knows how calendars work) but we introduced a unique symptom checker that used a conversational interface. That small bit of innovation made the app memorable without making users feel lost.

Start With Your Core Features

Your core functionality should almost always lean towards safe and proven patterns. Users dont want to figure out how to do basic things—they want those bits to just work. But once you've nailed those fundamentals? That's when you can afford to take risks. A fintech client of mine wanted to completely reimagine how people view their spending habits. We kept the transaction lists and payment features standard, but created this really interesting visual spending map that nobody else was doing. Some users loved it, some ignored it completely... but it didn't matter because the core features worked perfectly either way. Understanding how your revenue model affects investor appeal can also help you make informed decisions about which risks are worth taking.

Consider Your Risk Tolerance

Your budget and timeline directly affect how much risk you can take on. If you've got £50k and three months, you probably shouldn't be betting everything on an untested interaction model. But if you're well-funded and have time to iterate based on user feedback? You can afford to be bolder. I always tell clients to think about their MVP as the safe version—get that out, see how people use it, then gradually introduce the riskier features as updates. Its much easier to add innovation than to recover from a confusing launch that drives users away immediately.

What Your Users Care About More Than Trends

You know what's funny? After building apps for fintech companies, healthcare startups, and retail brands for nearly a decade, I've noticed something that never changes—users don't actually care about whether you're using the latest design trend or framework. They care about three things: does it work reliably, does it solve their problem right now, and can they figure out how to use it without thinking too hard.

I worked on an e-commerce app where the client wanted to add all these trendy animations and gestures because their competitor had them. Problem was, their checkout conversion rate was already struggling at 2.1% (which is pretty poor, by the way). When we tested the fancy new interface, it dropped to 1.8%. But here's the thing—when we focused on reducing the number of taps to purchase from seven to three, and made the payment options clearer, conversion jumped to 3.4%. Boring changes. Big results.

What Actually Drives User Satisfaction

Based on retention data I've analysed across dozens of apps, here's what genuinely matters to users in order of impact:

• Speed—if your app takes more than 2 seconds to load, you're losing people before they even start
• Reliability—crashes are death; even one crash per user session kills trust instantly
• Clarity—users should never wonder what will happen when they tap something
• Privacy—after iOS 14.5 especially, users want to know exactly what data you're collecting and why
• Value—does this actually make their life easier or better in some measurable way

I mean, think about the apps you use every day. You probably cant even remember what design trend they're following because you're too busy actually using them to notice. That's the sweet spot we should all be aiming for—apps that are so focused on solving real problems that the design choices become invisible. Sure, good design matters, but it should serve function, not distract from it. When considering design patterns for specific industries, it's worth checking out specialised design considerations that prioritise usability over trends.

Track your app's core user satisfaction metrics (load time, crash rate, task completion rate) before you chase any trend. If these fundamentals aren't sorted, no amount of trendy features will save you from poor reviews and high uninstall rates.

Testing Your Ideas Before Going All In

I can't tell you how many times I've had clients who want to spend £50,000 building a full app before they've even validated if anyone actually wants it. Its honestly one of the biggest mistakes I see, and I get it—when you're excited about an idea, whether its following a trend or creating something completely new, you want to jump straight in. But here's what nine years of building apps has taught me: testing is cheaper than failing.

The best approach I've found is to start with what we call a minimum testable product, which is different from an MVP. You're not building anything yet—you're validating assumptions. For a fintech app we worked on, the client wanted to build an entire investment platform because they'd seen similar apps trending. Instead, we convinced them to first create a landing page explaining the concept and run £500 worth of Facebook ads to their target market. The conversion rate was terrible. Turns out people didn't trust a new investment platform from an unknown brand, which would've been a painful lesson after spending £80,000 on development. Building an email list before launch is one of the most effective ways to validate real interest in your concept.

Ways to Test Before Building

• Landing pages with email signups—if you cant get 100 people interested for free, why will they pay or download?
• Clickable prototypes using Figma or Adobe XD to test user flows without writing code
• Social media campaigns showing mockups to gauge genuine interest versus polite enthusiasm
• Beta waitlists that require small commitments (like referring friends) to separate real interest from casual curiosity
• Survey your existing customers if you have them—they're more likely to be honest than strangers

One healthcare app we built started with just a Google Form and some basic automation. The founder manually processed requests for two months to prove people would actually use the service. It was clunky and time-consuming, but it cost basically nothing and proved the concept before we spent six months building the real platform. That manual testing phase also revealed user needs they hadn't considered, which completely changed our technical approach... and probably saved the whole project from being the wrong solution to the right problem. Understanding how to influence user behaviour during onboarding can also help you design better validation tests.

Long-Term Thinking in a Fast-Moving Market

The mobile app market moves fast. Really fast. But here's what I've learned after nearly a decade in this industry—the apps that last are rarely the ones chasing every new feature or design trend that pops up. I mean, I've seen so many apps rebuild their entire UI every 18 months because they thought they needed to look "modern" and honestly? Most of them just confused their existing users and didn't attract many new ones.

When we built a healthcare app a few years back, the client wanted to incorporate chatbots because everyone was talking about them. Fair enough. But we pushed back a bit and asked: will your users still need this in three years? Will the core problem you're solving change? The answer was no—patients needed reliable appointment booking and medication reminders, not a chatbot that could tell jokes. We built those core features properly instead, and that app is still going strong with the same foundation whilst competitors have gone through two complete redesigns trying to stay trendy. This is why preventing your app from becoming irrelevant requires focusing on lasting value rather than short-term trends.

The best long-term strategy isnt ignoring trends completely—its building a foundation strong enough that you can adopt new features when they actually matter to your users

Think about your apps architecture and core features as the foundation of a building. You can redecorate the rooms, add new furniture, even knock down a wall or two; but if the foundation is solid you dont need to start from scratch every time something new comes along. This means investing time upfront in good code structure, proper documentation, and features that solve real problems rather than features that just look good in a pitch deck. Sure, its less exciting than jumping on every new thing, but its what separates apps that survive from apps that burn through their budget and disappear. And if you're struggling with visibility, learning how to improve your app store ranking is often more valuable than adding trendy features.

Conclusion

After years of building apps across every industry you can think of, here's what I've learned about trends vs originality—it's not really about choosing one or the other. The apps that succeed are the ones that understand their users deeply enough to know which trends will genuinely help them and which are just noise. I've seen brilliant apps fail because they chased every shiny new feature, and I've seen simple apps thrive because they focused relentlessly on solving one problem really well.

When you're making decisions about your app, ask yourself the same question I ask my clients: will this make life better for the person using it? Not "will this look good in our pitch deck" or "is everyone else doing it" but genuinely, will someone's day be easier because of this choice? That perspective has saved more projects than I can count, and its stopped us from wasting budget on features that looked impressive but nobody actually used.

The market moves fast and there will always be new frameworks, design patterns, and "must-have" features being talked about. Some of them matter. Most don't. Your job isn't to follow everything—its to filter through the noise and find what aligns with your vision and serves your users. Build something that solves a real problem, test it with actual people, iterate based on what you learn, and don't be afraid to zig when everyone else is zagging. The apps I'm most proud of from my career aren't the ones that followed every trend perfectly; they're the ones that had the courage to be different when it mattered and the wisdom to learn from others when it helped.