Skip to main content
Question

RevenueCat JS SDK size + Web Billing lock-in concerns

  • August 17, 2025
  • 2 replies
  • 60 views
I
Forum|alt.badge.img

Hi everyone,

We recently started using RevenueCat with React (non-native) and are relying on the JS library.

We’re not using RevenueCat Web Subscriptions, since we’d prefer not to be locked into their billing system. Instead, we’re just using the library to check customer subscriptions and retrieve entitlements.

One thing we noticed is that the JS library is huge - about 671 KB.

A few questions came up internally:

  • Is there any way to reduce the bundle size? Maybe a “lite” or “compact” version of the library?

  • Can we safely use the RC REST API directly from the frontend and skip the JS lib?

  • Is it possible to listen to customer info changes same as in RN?

  • From what we understand, RC Web Billing forces you into their billing system for web. Why is this restriction so aggressive? Is there really no way to fetch offerings and use Stripe directly without all the extra complexity?

This has sparked a lot of discussion in our team about whether to keep using RC at all, since the lock-in feels very restrictive. If we start using RC Web Billing, it seems like we couldn’t leave later without interrupting all recurring payments that RC manages.

Would love to hear if others ran into this and how you approached it.

This post has been closed for comments

2 replies

N
RevenueCat Staff
Forum|alt.badge.img+1
  • Nicola
  • RevenueCat Staff
  • August 18, 2025

Hi ​@idan-gozlan-91a42a,

thanks for your feedback on RevenueCat Web Billing.
I understand your concerns regarding the vendor lock in. We are working on extending the sdk also to Stripe and Paddle natively, as you can see we recently shipped the WPL support for Paddle and we’ll work in the next months to support natively both of them. I cannot give you an exact timeline on when but I can assure you that we are working on that right now.

Regarding the bundle size, at the moment we don’t have a solution for this issue, however we heard you loud and clear. We are discussing internally how to split the “api part” from the “purchase part”. In other words we want to split getting offerings/entitlements from executing the purchase with a full interface.

We initially prioritised simplicity for customers that wanted it together in a single package, but we are receiving more an more requests to have a “core” or “light” package as you mentioned for the web.

I hope this clarification on the direction will help you trusting us more, if we don’t have what you are asking for right now it’s a matter of time and roadmap. We do not have any desire of locking customers with us, we want customers to feel they can come with whatever billing engine they have and use it through RevenueCat. We just didn’t get yet to integrate them all, but they are coming soon!

Please let me know if I can answer further questions and thanks again for sharing your feedback.

I
Forum|alt.badge.img

Thanks for the honest answer. We appreciate that alot.

Terms & ConditionsCookie settingsAccessibility statement