SuperApps are considered the next evolutionary step of digital platforms worldwide. In Asia, they combine communication, payments, and services for hundreds of millions of users. In Europe, however, the model remains the exception. This is less due to a lack of technology than to fundamentally different requirements. Gartner analyses show that while numerous SuperApps exist globally, only one provider regularly appears in Europe. This raises a fundamental question: Does Europe even need the same kind of SuperApps as Asia – or a different model?

SuperApps: Global success, European reluctance

SuperApps are mobile platforms that consolidate a wide range of digital services into one application via mini-apps – from messaging and payments to administrative or mobility services. In China, Southeast Asia, and Latin America, they are an integral part of daily life. WeChat, Alipay, and Grab each reach tens or even hundreds of millions of users.

Gartner does not consider SuperApps a short-term trend but a long-term architectural model. Analysts expect SuperApps to continue growing in importance worldwide. According to Gartner, by 2027, half of the world’s population will use SuperApps daily.

In Europe, however, no mass-market SuperApp ecosystem has emerged despite comparable smartphone penetration and digital infrastructure. The reason is not a lack of innovation, but structural differences that fundamentally shape the development of such platforms.

Gartner: SuperApps as architecture, not as an app

Gartner describes SuperApps not primarily as consumer products but as a strategic architectural model. The focus is on integrated identities, secure transactions, and the ability to orchestrate complex ecosystems.

Notably, in the European context, Gartner mentions only one provider in the SuperApp space – not because of user numbers or consumer reach, but due to an entirely different approach.

Europe as a special case: Security, state, trust

While Asian SuperApps mainly represent private ecosystems, Europe faces a different starting point. Digital identities, government services, and regulated industries cannot easily be integrated into private platforms here.

Requirements arising from GDPR, eIDAS 2.0, NIS2, or the EU AI Act fundamentally change the architecture of such systems. From 2026, these regulations will be fully implemented in operational practice. SuperApps in Europe cannot therefore emerge as purely private platforms but must be compatible with governmental identity and administrative structures from the outset. Regulation does not act as an innovation brake but as an architectural guideline: it enforces federated models, clear responsibilities, and technically verifiable trust. These requirements structurally differentiate European SuperApps from global consumer ecosystems.

In Europe, SuperApps are therefore less about “more services in one app” and more about how digital identity, payments, and communication can be combined securely, transparently, and compatibly with public infrastructures in cities, municipalities, and government agencies.

Why European SuperApps work differently

Against this backdrop, it becomes clear why Europe’s approach to SuperApps differs from globally dominant models. While international platforms focus primarily on reach, user frequency, and closed ecosystems, Europe prioritizes structural requirements: digital identity, security, regulatory compliance, and the integration of public institutions.

Gartner classifies European SuperApp approaches less as traditional consumer products and more as infrastructural platforms. The focus is on stable identities, trustworthy transactions, and the ability to integrate governmental, municipal, and regulated services interoperably. This perspective explains why Europe is visible in the global SuperApp market not for volume, but for architecture and governance.

Practical examples at the municipal and state level show that such platforms emerge where digital everyday services are combined with public infrastructure. The combination of everyday usage, identity management, and administration fundamentally distinguishes European SuperApp models from private platform ecosystems in other regions.

Two models, Two logics

The comparison highlights the differences:

Both models follow different logics and are not easily transferable.

KOBIL SuperApp: Municipal and governmental practice instead of consumer platform

A concrete example of the European approach is the KOBIL SuperApp. It is not positioned as an open consumer platform but as a digital trust layer for cities, municipalities, and governmental actors. In Worms, the SuperApp is used to consolidate digital services, secure identities, and administrative processes in a controlled architecture. In Istanbul, the same platform approach is used to provide municipal services, identity functions, and digital everyday services interoperably.

Both use cases illustrate the goal of European SuperApps: not maximum reach or advertising economy, but the secure integration of public infrastructure, verifiable identities, and controlled digital processes across organizational boundaries.

What this means for Europe

The central question is not why Europe has not produced SuperApps like WeChat, but whether it makes sense to replicate these models under European conditions. Gartner’s assessment suggests that a unique European understanding of SuperApps is emerging – one that focuses less on volume and more on security, identity, and public infrastructure. This is the strategic difference from the global mainstream.

For Europe, this creates an opportunity to establish SuperApps as part of public services – interoperable, federated, and compatible with European identity and administrative structures. In the long term, this model could strengthen Europe’s digital sovereignty and reduce dependency on U.S. and Chinese platform ecosystems.

Key Facts: SuperApps in Europe