Apple Push (APNS) vs Expo
Compare Apple Push (APNS) and Expo based on observed push API performance and features
Live performance comparison
Real-world performance data from notifications sent through Knock
| Provider | Notification volume | Growth | Status page updates (30d) | Status page updates (90d) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 25M–100M | 3rd of 5 → | 0 | 0 |
| 100M–500M | 2nd of 5 ↑ | 0 | 1 |
From April 18th to July 17th, Knock routed 25M–100M notifications through Apple Push (APNS) and 100M–500M through Expo. Apple Push (APNS) reported 0 status page updates over the last 90 days, while Expo reported 1.
Response time
Response time measures how long each provider takes to accept a push API request from Knock, including connection overhead and any automatic retries. Lower values mean faster notification hand-off.
| Provider | Median (p50) | p90 | p95 | p99 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 66ms | 115ms | 132ms | 180ms |
| 44ms | 73ms | 91ms | 201ms |
The chart above shows each provider's daily median response time (p50) from April 18th to July 17th. The top-line number is an average of these daily values: Apple Push (APNS) averaged 66ms compared to 44ms for Expo. Apple Push (APNS)'s highest daily p50 was 80ms; Expo's was 68ms. Expo is 22ms faster at the median, which can add up at high volumes.
The 90th percentile (p90) captures the slowest 10% of requests, revealing how each provider handles moderate stress. Averaged across all days, Apple Push (APNS) has a p90 of 115ms compared to 73ms for Expo. The highest daily p90 was 142ms for Apple Push (APNS) and 159ms for Expo. Expo handles these slower requests 42ms faster, suggesting more consistent performance across the board.
The 99th percentile (p99) represents the long tail — the slowest 1% of requests. Averaged across all days, Apple Push (APNS) reached 180ms at p99 while Expo reached 201ms. The highest daily p99 was 308ms for Apple Push (APNS) and 5215ms for Expo, indicating the worst-case response time during spikes or provider-side congestion. Both providers exhibit comparable tail response times, meaning neither is significantly more prone to outlier slowdowns.
Error rate
Error rate tracks the ratio of 5xx responses and timeouts to total push API requests. Knock automatically retries failed requests, so transient provider errors rarely affect end-user delivery.
| Provider | Avg. daily error rate | Highest daily rate | Peak error date | Zero-error days | Days above 0.01% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00% | 0.00% | Apr 18 | 91 | 0 |
| 0.03% | 2.21% | May 23 | 51 | 11 |
Averaged across the date range, Apple Push (APNS) shows a 0.00% daily error rate compared to 0.03% for Expo. The highest single-day error rate was 0.00% for Apple Push (APNS) and 2.21% for Expo. Both providers show similar reliability levels, with error rates well within acceptable thresholds. Knock automatically retries failed requests to both providers, minimizing the impact of transient errors on end-user delivery.
About these metrics: Data represents notifications sent through Knock during the specified period. Response time measures time from Knock to provider acceptance. Error rate includes only provider 5xx responses and timeouts.
Recent Apple Push (APNS) incidents
Recent status page incidents for Apple Push (APNS)
No incidents reported in the last 90 days
Recent Expo incidents
Recent status page incidents for Expo
Started May 14, 2026 — Resolved May 14, 2026
This Incident has been resolved and services are operating normally again.
Pros and cons
Apple Push (APNS)
Expo
Pros
- Free with no per-notification cost at any volume
- Native platform integration ensures the most reliable delivery to Apple devices
- Supports rich notifications with media, interactive elements, and Live Activities
- Token-based auth simplifies certificate management at scale
Pros
- Simplifies push for React Native apps by abstracting away APNS and FCM complexity
- Free push notification delivery with no per-message costs
- Receipt tracking enables monitoring delivery success and debugging failures
- No need to manage platform-specific credentials or certificates
Cons
- Limited to Apple platforms only (iOS, macOS, watchOS, tvOS)
- No built-in analytics or delivery confirmation beyond basic device feedback
- Apple's status page has no public API or RSS feed for incident monitoring
Cons
- Tied to the Expo ecosystem; apps ejected from Expo lose some push conveniences
- Platform features beyond push (EAS Build, EAS Update) require a paid plan at scale
- Adds a proxy layer between your app and APNS/FCM, which can increase latency
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between Apple Push (APNS) and Expo?
APNS is Apple's native push notification service, providing free, reliable delivery to all Apple devices with support for rich media and Live Activities. Expo provides a unified push notification API for React Native apps, abstracting away APNS and FCM complexity with free delivery and built-in receipt tracking. Apple Push (APNS) is best suited for ios and macos notifications, while Expo is geared toward react native and expo apps.
Which is cheaper, Apple Push (APNS) or Expo?
APNS is free to use with no per-notification cost. Apple does not charge for push notification delivery regardless of volume. The only requirement is an active Apple Developer Program membership ($99/year). Expo push notifications are free with no per-message cost. The broader Expo platform has paid tiers: Production at $99/month and Enterprise at $999/month, which include EAS Build, EAS Update, and priority support. Push notification delivery itself has no additional cost at any tier. The best value depends on your sending volume and target platforms.
Which is faster, Apple Push (APNS) or Expo?
Based on real-world data from Knock, Apple Push (APNS) has a median push API response time (p50) of 66ms compared to 44ms for Expo.
Which is more reliable, Apple Push (APNS) or Expo?
From April 18th to July 17th, Apple Push (APNS) showed an error rate of 0.00% while Expo showed 0.03%. Both rates are within acceptable thresholds for production push notification delivery, and Knock automatically retries failed requests to minimize the impact of transient errors.
Which is more popular, Apple Push (APNS) or Expo?
On the Knock platform, Apple Push (APNS) handled 25M–100M notifications from April 18th to July 17th compared to 100M–500M for Expo. Apple Push (APNS) volume has remained stable, while Expo is trending upward.
Can I use both Apple Push (APNS) and Expo together?
Yes. Knock enables you to integrate multiple push notification providers into a single notification workflow. You can use Apple Push (APNS) and Expo side by side, route traffic between them, or migrate from one to the other without changing your application code.
What are the main pros and cons of Apple Push (APNS) vs Expo?
Apple Push (APNS) strengths include free with no per-notification cost at any volume and native platform integration ensures the most reliable delivery to apple devices. Expo strengths include simplifies push for react native apps by abstracting away apns and fcm complexity and free push notification delivery with no per-message costs. On the other hand, Apple Push (APNS) drawbacks include limited to apple platforms only (ios, macos, watchos, tvos), while Expo drawbacks include tied to the expo ecosystem; apps ejected from expo lose some push conveniences.
Use either provider with Knock
Knock enables you to integrate Apple Push (APNS), Expo, or any combination of push notification providers into a single notification workflow. Manage templates, orchestrate cross-channel delivery, and switch providers without changing your code.