QuackQuack's Friendship Data: A Warning for Dating App Economics

Dating apps are being hijacked for friendship, and the business implications are more troubling than heartwarming. New survey data from Indian platform QuackQuack reveals that nearly a third of users are forming platonic connections on apps designed explicitly for romance—a behaviour shift that threatens the subscription models underpinning the entire industry. The generational divide is stark, with Gen Z leading a repurposing of dating infrastructure that operators never planned for.

QuackQuack surveyed its user base to examine how romantic platforms are being repurposed for non-romantic connection. The findings point to a behavioural shift that challenges the subscription model most dating operators rely on: if singles are using the apps to make friends rather than find dates, they're less likely to convert to paid members or delete their accounts after matching successfully.

The generational split tells the real story. According to the company's data, 27% of Gen Z users maintain platonic relationships through dating apps, compared to just 7% of those over 35. Younger users appear to treat these platforms as general-purpose social infrastructure rather than tools built specifically for romantic matching.

Create a free account

Unlock unlimited access and get the weekly briefing delivered to your inbox.

Friendship features versus organic drift

Bumble (BMBL) launched Bumble BFF in 2016. Plenty of operators have since added friendship modes or platonic matching features. What makes the QuackQuack data notable is that it describes unintended use—singles meeting on romantic platforms and choosing to maintain friendships instead. That's different from opting into a designated friendship feature.

Ravi Mittal, founder and CEO of QuackQuack, characterised these connections as 'low-effort, high-reward', framing them as superior to traditional friendships that require geographic proximity and scheduling coordination. 'Online friendships offer connection without the usual social exhaustion,' he told media outlets covering the survey.

That framing warrants scrutiny. Low-effort connection might be convenient, but whether it's genuinely replacing meaningful social bonds or simply providing a more palatable form of isolation is a different question. The survey indicates these relationships are replacing real-world friendships, not supplementing them—a claim that, if accurate, suggests deeper dysfunction in how younger users are experiencing social life offline.

QuackQuack's own research backs this up. Earlier in 2025, the company released data showing friendship had become a first priority over romance for a meaningful segment of its user base. This isn't an isolated finding. It's a pattern emerging in one of the world's largest and fastest-growing dating markets.

The unit economics of accidental friendship apps

For operators, the business problem is straightforward. Dating apps monetise through subscriptions, boost purchases, and other features designed to help users find romantic matches. If users are treating the platform as a casual friendship network, conversion rates suffer. Successful matches don't necessarily lead to account deletion—traditionally one sign of product success—but they also don't drive the urgency that makes singles pay for premium features.

Match Group (MTCH) and Bumble have spent years refining engagement mechanics to keep users active without burning them out. Introducing friendship functionality risks creating a lower-intent, lower-monetising user segment that still consumes product resources and moderates content at the same cost.

Dating apps would effectively become accidental social networks without the infrastructure, safety features, or business model to support that role.

The alternative—ignoring the trend and letting it play out organically—means ceding control over product direction to user behaviour that wasn't planned for. Dating apps would effectively become accidental social networks without the infrastructure, safety features, or business model to support that role.

India's dating market adds specific context. Digital adoption is accelerating, but social norms around dating remain conservative in many regions. Using dating apps for friendships might offer plausible deniability for users who face family or cultural pressure. That could mean the QuackQuack data is capturing behaviour unique to markets where dating carries social risk.

But the generational divide suggests something broader. Gen Z globally reports higher rates of loneliness and social isolation than previous generations, according to multiple studies. They've also spent formative years socialising through screens during pandemic lockdowns. Whether they're using dating apps for friendship because it's easier or because they lack alternative pathways to connection probably depends on who you ask.

What operators should watch

The immediate question for product teams: is this a market-specific anomaly or the leading edge of a behaviour shift that will reach Western markets? If Gen Z users in the US and UK start treating Hinge and Tinder as de facto friendship apps, the same unit economics problems will follow.

Bumble's already made the strategic bet that friendship features can coexist with romantic matching under one brand. That diversification might look prescient if QuackQuack's data reflects a sustainable trend rather than a temporary quirk of post-pandemic social behaviour.

For operators without friendship features, the risk is building them too late—after users have already drifted to platforms that serve both needs. The counter-risk is building them too early and confusing your core value proposition for investors who've been told dating apps are high-margin subscription businesses, not general social platforms.

QuackQuack's survey didn't disclose sample size or methodology, which limits how much weight the 2-in-7 figure should carry. But even directionally, the data points to something trust and safety teams should monitor. Platonic relationships formed on dating platforms weren't part of the risk models most operators built their moderation systems around. Different interaction patterns mean different abuse vectors and different duty-of-care obligations, particularly as regulators tighten requirements around online safety.

The broader thread here is product-market fit erosion. Dating apps were built for a specific job. If a meaningful segment of users—particularly the youngest cohort—are hiring them for a different job entirely, operators face a choice between pivoting to meet that demand or reasserting what their platforms are actually for. Both paths have costs. The worst option is pretending the tension doesn't exist.