Topic starter
19/08/2026 3:37 pm
TL;DR: MAU billing can inflate identity infrastructure invoices by 5x to 7x on a single spike day, while aDAU better tracks authenticated usage and can reduce costs by 30% to 75% depending on traffic patterns, according to Ory. For IAM and platform teams, the issue is proportionality: pricing tied to monthly peaks can misrepresent actual identity load and complicate capacity, budgeting, and procurement decisions.
Editorial analysis by NHI Mgmt Group, based on content published by Ory: “MAU vs aDAU: How Identity Pricing Models Compare”.
Key questions
Q: How should identity teams compare MAU and aDAU pricing models?
A: Start with actual usage behaviour, not vendor price cards.
Q: Why can MAU pricing make identity costs look higher than actual usage?
A: Because MAU counts any user who authenticates during the month as a full monthly unit, even if they only appear on one day.
Q: What are the best ways to forecast identity spend for spiky applications?
A: Use historical usage curves, not just total monthly sign-ins.
Practitioner guidance
- Model spend by traffic pattern Compare MAU and aDAU projections for spike-heavy, workweek, and low-frequency applications before choosing a billing model.
- Use observed DAU/MAU ratios Build pricing forecasts from real return frequency instead of assuming every monthly user carries equal infrastructure weight.
- Separate rollout peaks from steady-state usage Treat launch events, promotions, and seasonal surges as distinct demand profiles when estimating identity costs.
Bottom line: MAU pricing can misrepresent identity infrastructure cost when usage is bursty, because one spike day can influence the whole billing month.
Explore further
View Full Forum → | NHI Foundation Course → | Our Services → | Read the full analysis →
19/08/2026 4:17 pm
MAU is a poor proxy for identity infrastructure consumption when usage is bursty. Monthly counting rewards presence, not load, so one promotional or event-driven spike can define the whole invoice. That breaks the assumption that identity cost scales smoothly with real demand. For practitioners, the pricing model becomes a governance issue, not just a finance detail.
A question worth separating out:
Q: What should procurement teams ask when a provider bills on active users?
A: Ask whether the billing unit reflects monthly reach or daily authentication activity, and request examples based on your own traffic profile. Also ask how spikes, overlap, and user recurrence are counted. Those questions expose whether the invoice will track real usage or simply the highest monthly footprint.
👉 Read our full editorial: MAU pricing distorts identity infrastructure costs on spike days