What are the pricing models for IoT platforms?

This blog post has been written by the person who has mapped the IoT platforms market in a clean and beautiful presentation

What Are The Pricing Models For IoT Platforms? A Complete Guide For Entrepreneurs And Investors

The IoT platforms market presents a complex pricing landscape where success depends on choosing the right model for your target customers and use cases.

In 2025, the most profitable IoT companies combine subscription-based predictability with pay-as-you-go flexibility through hybrid models that capture both steady revenue and usage spikes. Leading platforms like AWS IoT, Azure IoT, and Google Cloud IoT have proven that granular, component-based billing—charging separately for connectivity time, message volume, and processing actions—maximizes revenue while giving customers precise cost control.

And if you need to understand this market in 30 minutes with the latest information, you can download our quick market pitch.

What Are The Main Pricing Models Currently Used By IoT Platform Providers In 2025?

Six core pricing models dominate the IoT platform landscape, each optimized for different customer segments and usage patterns.

Pay-as-you-go (PAYG) models charge purely based on consumption—data transferred, messages sent, or connectivity time used. AWS IoT Core exemplifies this with $1.00 per million messages and $0.08 per million connection minutes. This model eliminates upfront commitments but typically carries higher per-unit costs.

Subscription models offer fixed periodic pricing for defined service bundles. Azure IoT Hub's B1 tier costs $10 monthly and includes specific message volumes and device limits. These models provide cost predictability and often include volume discounts for enterprise customers.

Hybrid models combine subscription bases with PAYG overages, capturing both steady usage and unexpected spikes. Companies like Spenza use this approach for eSIM connectivity, charging a base subscription plus variable data rates.

Tiered or pooled models create shared resource pools across device fleets, allowing redistribution of unused capacity. This works particularly well for enterprises with predictable aggregate usage but variable individual device consumption.

Need a clear, elegant overview of a market? Browse our structured slide decks for a quick, visual deep dive.

How Does A Pay-As-You-Go Model Compare To Subscription-Based Pricing For IoT Services?

The fundamental trade-off between PAYG and subscription models centers on flexibility versus predictability, with distinct cost implications for different business scenarios.

If you want to build on this market, you can download our latest market pitch deck here

Which IoT Pricing Models Have Proven To Be The Most Profitable For Startups And Large Companies?

Profitability patterns differ significantly between startups and established enterprises, with hybrid models emerging as the optimal strategy for both segments.

For startups, PAYG and hybrid models minimize financial risk while enabling rapid market testing. Early-stage companies benefit from avoiding large subscription commitments that could strain cash flow during uncertain growth phases. Onomondo's "hands-free PAYG" model, which only charges for data-active months without SIM fees, exemplifies startup-friendly pricing that aligns costs with actual business value generation.

Large enterprises achieve maximum profitability through subscription and tiered models that leverage predictable usage patterns for volume discounts. Enterprise customers value cost certainty for budgeting purposes and can commit to annual contracts that unlock significant savings. Azure IoT Hub's enterprise tiers demonstrate this approach, offering substantial per-unit cost reductions for committed usage volumes.

Hybrid models increasingly prove most profitable across both segments because they capture steady baseline revenue while monetizing usage spikes. Industrial IoT deployments often follow predictable patterns with occasional peak events—hybrid pricing captures both revenue streams without leaving money on the table.

Platform providers report that hybrid customers show 40-60% higher lifetime value compared to pure PAYG users, while maintaining 20-30% higher retention rates than subscription-only customers who may churn due to overprovisioning costs.

What Pricing Strategies Are Most Common Among Leading IoT Platforms Like AWS IoT, Azure IoT, And Google Cloud IoT?

The three dominant cloud IoT platforms employ sophisticated component-based billing that charges separately for each service layer, maximizing revenue capture while providing granular cost control.

How Do Companies Typically Charge For Data Usage, Device Connectivity, And Cloud Processing In IoT Ecosystems?

IoT pricing structures separate infrastructure costs into distinct billing components, each reflecting underlying resource consumption patterns and enabling precise cost allocation.

Data usage billing typically follows tiered PAYG models with volume discounts. Connectivity providers charge per MB or GB consumed, with pooled plans allowing sharing across device fleets. Enterprise customers often negotiate committed data volumes with overage rates—for example, a 100GB monthly pool at $2 per GB with $4 per GB overages.

Device connectivity charges focus on connection time rather than data volume, recognizing that maintaining IoT device sessions consumes network resources regardless of throughput. AWS IoT's $0.08 per million connection minutes reflects this approach, billing for the duration devices remain connected to the platform.

Cloud processing encompasses multiple service layers with distinct pricing. Message ingestion rates typically range from $1-40 per million messages depending on the platform and processing complexity. Rules engine operations, which filter and route messages, carry separate charges reflecting computational overhead. Storage and analytics services use traditional cloud pricing models based on data volume and query frequency.

Looking for the latest market trends? We break them down in sharp, digestible presentations you can skim or share.

Advanced processing services like machine learning inference, edge computing, and real-time analytics command premium pricing due to specialized infrastructure requirements. These services often use consumption-based models that align costs with actual business value delivered.

What Are Examples Of Companies Using Innovative Or Hybrid Pricing Models In The IoT Space?

Several companies have developed creative pricing approaches that better align costs with customer value creation and usage patterns.

Spenza pioneered hybrid eSIM connectivity pricing, combining base subscriptions for network access with PAYG rates for data consumption spikes. This model particularly benefits logistics companies with predictable baseline connectivity needs but unpredictable data bursts during peak shipping periods.

Onomondo's "hands-free PAYG" model only charges customers for months when their devices actually consume data, eliminating traditional SIM management fees. This approach reduces barriers for seasonal IoT deployments like agricultural sensors that may remain dormant for months.

Nabto demonstrates pricing model flexibility by offering both per-device subscriptions and per-host licensing options. Customers can choose the structure that best matches their deployment economics—per-device for large fleets or per-host for development environments with many devices per host system.

Some industrial IoT providers experiment with outcome-based pricing tied to business results rather than technical metrics. For example, charging per unit manufactured rather than per message sent, or per efficiency improvement achieved rather than per sensor deployed.

If you want actionable data about this market, you can download our latest market pitch deck here

How Do Use Cases Like Smart Homes, Industrial IoT, Agriculture, And Healthcare Influence The Choice Of Pricing Model?

Different IoT verticals exhibit distinct usage patterns and value drivers that strongly influence optimal pricing model selection.

Smart home deployments favor subscription or hardware-plus-subscription models because consumers expect predictable monthly bills similar to other home services. Ring cameras and Nest devices exemplify this approach, charging upfront for hardware plus monthly subscriptions for cloud storage and premium features. The steady telemetry patterns and consumer preference for fixed costs make subscriptions ideal.

Industrial IoT environments often require hybrid models due to variable operational patterns. Manufacturing facilities generate steady baseline data during normal operations but experience massive data spikes during maintenance events, quality issues, or peak production periods. Hybrid pricing captures both usage patterns without penalizing customers for operational variability.

Agricultural IoT strongly favors PAYG or tiered models due to highly seasonal usage patterns. Soil sensors, weather stations, and irrigation controllers may operate intensively during growing seasons but remain largely dormant during off-seasons. Annual subscriptions would create significant waste, making consumption-based pricing more appropriate.

Healthcare IoT increasingly adopts outcome-based or hybrid models reflecting the high-value, mission-critical nature of medical monitoring. Providers might charge per patient monitored or per clinical event detected, aligning pricing with health outcomes rather than technical metrics. The critical uptime requirements and regulatory compliance needs justify premium pricing structures.

Planning your next move in this new space? Start with a clean visual breakdown of market size, models, and momentum.

What Emerging Pricing Models Are Expected To Become Popular Or Disruptive In 2026?

Three transformative pricing models are gaining traction for 2026 deployment, driven by AI capabilities and increased focus on business outcomes.

Outcome-based pricing represents the most significant shift, moving beyond technical metrics to charge for business results achieved. Manufacturing IoT providers increasingly offer "pay-per-widget-produced" models, where pricing aligns directly with production output rather than sensor data volume. Healthcare monitoring services charge per health event detected or per patient outcome improved, creating direct value alignment.

AI-driven dynamic pricing uses machine learning to adjust rates in real-time based on network load, usage patterns, and demand forecasting. This model optimizes both customer costs and provider margins by incentivizing usage during low-demand periods while capturing premium pricing during peak times. Early implementations show 15-25% margin improvements for providers while reducing customer costs during off-peak periods.

Network-as-a-Service (NaaS) bundles connectivity, edge computing, and analytics under unified SLA-based pricing. Rather than separating infrastructure components, NaaS providers offer comprehensive service delivery guarantees with simplified pricing. This model particularly appeals to enterprises seeking single-vendor accountability for complex IoT deployments.

Edge-to-cloud hybrid pricing reflects the growing importance of edge computing in IoT architectures. These models separately price edge processing capabilities while integrating them with cloud services, enabling customers to optimize costs by processing data locally when appropriate and leveraging cloud resources for complex analytics.

Which Business Models—Such As SaaS, PaaS, BaaS, Or Hardware-Plus-Subscription—Are Currently Leading In Revenue Generation For IoT?

SaaS and PaaS models currently dominate IoT revenue generation, though hardware-plus-subscription and BaaS models show rapid growth trajectories.

Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) IoT platforms generate the highest revenue volumes through application-layer services like fleet management, asset tracking, and analytics dashboards. These platforms typically charge monthly or annual subscriptions based on device count, user seats, or data volume processed. SaaS models benefit from lower infrastructure costs and higher margins compared to infrastructure-heavy alternatives.

Platform-as-a-Service (PaaS) offerings from AWS IoT, Azure IoT, and Google Cloud IoT represent the largest revenue segment due to enterprise adoption of cloud-native IoT development. PaaS providers capture value through usage-based billing across multiple service components, creating diverse revenue streams that scale with customer growth.

Backend-as-a-Service (BaaS) shows explosive growth as startups outsource device management, firmware updates, and data processing infrastructure. BaaS providers offer specialized IoT backends that handle device connectivity, data ingestion, and basic analytics, allowing application developers to focus on business logic rather than infrastructure management.

Hardware-plus-subscription models dominate consumer IoT revenue, with companies like Ring, Peloton, and Tesla demonstrating the power of combining upfront hardware sales with ongoing service revenue. This model creates multiple revenue streams while building customer lock-in through integrated hardware-software experiences.

If you need to-the-point data on this market, you can download our latest market pitch deck here

What Are The Different Revenue Streams Available To IoT Platform Providers Beyond Direct Platform Access Fees?

IoT platform providers develop multiple revenue streams beyond basic platform access, creating diversified business models that capture value across the IoT stack.

Professional services represent a major revenue opportunity, including system integration, custom development, and deployment consulting. Many enterprises require specialized expertise to design, implement, and optimize IoT solutions, creating high-margin service revenue that often equals or exceeds platform subscription fees.

Data analytics and insights subscriptions provide premium value-added services that transform raw IoT data into business intelligence. Advanced analytics platforms charge separately for machine learning models, predictive analytics, and custom reporting capabilities that deliver direct business value beyond basic data collection.

Premium security and compliance packages address enterprise requirements for advanced threat detection, encryption, and regulatory compliance. Healthcare, financial services, and industrial customers willingly pay significant premiums for specialized security features that meet industry-specific requirements.

Marketplace and ecosystem revenue streams include app stores, third-party integrations, and partner revenue sharing. Platform providers take percentages from third-party applications, device certifications, and integration services that extend platform capabilities.

Edge computing module licensing and specialized hardware partnerships create additional revenue through certified device programs and edge processing capabilities that complement cloud services.

How Do Customer Retention And Lifetime Value Vary Across Different IoT Pricing Models?

Customer retention and lifetime value metrics show significant variation across pricing models, with subscription-based approaches delivering superior long-term economics despite higher initial barriers.

Subscription models achieve the highest customer lifetime value through predictable recurring revenue and lower churn rates. Enterprise subscription customers typically show 85-95% annual retention rates due to integration complexity and switching costs. The predictable revenue stream enables accurate customer lifetime value calculations, often reaching 5-10x annual subscription fees over multi-year relationships.

Pay-as-you-go models experience higher customer acquisition rates due to low barriers to entry but suffer from higher churn and lower lifetime value. PAYG customers may easily switch providers or pause usage without contractual penalties, resulting in 60-75% annual retention rates. However, PAYG can serve as an effective customer acquisition tool, with many providers converting successful PAYG users to subscription plans.

Hybrid models balance retention and value by combining subscription predictability with usage flexibility. These customers show intermediate retention rates of 75-85% while achieving higher lifetime value than pure PAYG customers. The base subscription component provides revenue predictability while usage charges capture growth.

Hardware-plus-subscription models create the strongest customer lock-in due to hardware dependencies and integrated experiences. Once customers invest in specialized IoT hardware, switching costs become prohibitive, resulting in retention rates exceeding 90%. However, the hardware subsidy or initial investment may reduce short-term profitability.

Curious about how money is made in this sector? Explore the most profitable business models in our sleek decks.

What Are The Key Risks And Cost Drivers To Consider When Choosing Or Investing In A Particular IoT Pricing Strategy?

IoT pricing strategy selection involves multiple risk factors and cost drivers that can significantly impact profitability and competitive positioning.

Usage volatility presents the primary risk for consumption-based models, where unpredictable demand spikes can overwhelm infrastructure capacity or create margin erosion. Providers must invest in elastic infrastructure that scales efficiently, while customers face budget uncertainty that complicates financial planning. Historical data suggests IoT usage can fluctuate 300-500% during peak events, requiring robust capacity planning.

Infrastructure cost variability affects all IoT pricing models but particularly impacts providers offering unlimited or fixed-price services. Cloud processing costs, data storage fees, and bandwidth charges can escalate rapidly with customer growth, potentially exceeding revenue if pricing models don't account for scale economics. Successful providers implement cost monitoring and dynamic resource allocation to maintain margins.

Regulatory and compliance costs increasingly impact IoT pricing strategies, particularly in healthcare, automotive, and industrial verticals. Data sovereignty requirements, security certifications, and privacy regulations add significant operational overhead that must be reflected in pricing models. GDPR compliance alone can add 15-25% to operational costs for European IoT deployments.

Customer acquisition and retention costs vary significantly across pricing models, with subscription models requiring higher upfront sales investment but delivering better long-term economics. PAYG models enable viral growth and self-service adoption but may struggle with customer stickiness and expansion revenue.

Technology evolution risks affect long-term pricing sustainability as new protocols, edge computing capabilities, and AI services change customer expectations and cost structures. Pricing models must accommodate technological advancement without penalizing early adopters or creating competitive disadvantages.

Conclusion

Sources

1. AWS IoT Core Pricing
2. Azure IoT Hub Pricing Details
3. Azure IoT Hub Developer Pricing Guide
4. Azure IoT Operations Pricing
5. Microsoft Azure IoT Hub Pricing Review
6. AWS IoT Core SaaS Adviser Profile
7. AWS IoT Core Pricing Review
8. Spenza IoT eSIM Pricing Models
9. Onomondo Pay-as-You-Go Data for IoT
10. Nabto IoT Connectivity Pricing Models
11. Forbes IoT Pricing Strategy Guide
12. OneSimCard IoT Data Plans Comparison
13. Zuora IoT Consumption Pricing Guide
14. Guarana Technologies IoT Development Cost Guide
15. ZipIt Wireless Consumption-Based Pricing
16. Pricing Solutions IoT Guide
17. TechTarget Top IoT Business Models
18. Onomondo Best IoT Data Plans Guide
19. LinkedIn IoT Monetization Models
20. CloudVisor AWS IoT Core Guide
21. Billsby IoT Subscription Billing
22. IoT For All Usage-Based Pricing
23. Link Labs IoT Technology Pricing Evolution