Mozilla increased revenue significantly in 2021
Mozilla published its annual audited financial statement for the year 2021, and the outlook could not be better.
The organization managed to increase total revenue to $600 million, an increase of more than $100 million compared to the year 2020. Search engine royalties, especially paid by Google but also other search engine companies, increased by more than $80 million in the year to $527 million.
While that is impressive growth, subscription and advertising revenue grew even more. Last year, Mozilla earned $24 million from subscriptions and advertising. In 2021, revenue grew to $56 million.
Mozilla's main revenue sources grew considerably. In fact, 2021's revenue is second only to 2019's revenue, but only because of a one-time payment Mozilla received in the year from Yahoo.
The organization managed to reduce expenses significantly in 2021 next to that. Total expenses were $339 million in 2021, a reduction of more than $100 million when compared to 2020's $438 million.
Software development expenses were reduced from $242 million to $199 million, general and administrative expenses from $137 million to $81 million, and branding and marketing from $37 million to $30 million.
Taken together, Mozilla managed to increase its net assets by almost $200 million to $1.164 million in 2021.
Still highly dependent on Google
Revenue depends to a large degree on search engine deals. While revenue from subscriptions and advertising is growing faster, it still makes up only a small amount of Mozilla's total revenue.
About 87% of Mozilla's total revenue comes from royalties. The organization renewed its search engine contract with Google in 2020 for three years. Details were not disclosed and since Firefox's user base seems to stagnate, it could be that Mozilla got better rates from Google. There are other possibilities, including more searching activity by Firefox users.
Subscription and advertising revenue grew by 133% in 2021. Information about individual services is not provided in the financial statement. Mozilla established several services in the past couple of years, including Firefox VPN, Pocket Premium and Hits, Firefox Relay and others. Advertising revenue is included in the section as well.
Analysis and Outlook
Mozilla managed to increase revenue by over $100 million in 2021. The 20.97% increase in revenue can be attributed to the new 2020 search engine deal with Google, and Mozilla's focus on increasing subscription and advertising revenue.
The organization is still dependent on search engine deals, and it looks as if this is not going to change anytime soon. The dependency is reduced every year though, and newly established services such as Firefox Relay Premium, may accelerate the trend in the coming years.
The search engine contract with Google ends in 2023 and there is a good chance that it will be renewed again in that year.
Mozilla's future is looking bright, financially.
You can check out the financial report for 2021 here.
Now You: do you use other Mozilla services, besides Firefox?
Yeah, they are still super dependent on Google.
And it’s fun when people write bullshits like “Mozilla means freedom, they are independent!”
Nope. One small move and Google can turn off the lights…
But good think Mozilla started to diversify. Sooner or later (or even it’s already in progress), they will sold our data to survive, but it’s normal
> And it’s fun when people write bullshits like “Mozilla means freedom, they are independent!”
Your comment is “bullshit”, to use your own words. They are independent. They have a contract with Google which means: Google pays money to be the default search engine in Firefox. End of the whole story.
> Nope. One small move and Google can turn off the lights…
Nonsense. Google can’t turn off Mozilla’s lights. Mozilla has financial reserves for a few years and even if Google wouldn’t be interestered anymore (and there is no signal that this would happen anytime soon) then there are still other search engines that would love to take this chance. Sure, probably for less money, but still for money.
> Sooner or later (or even it’s already in progress), they will sold our data to survive, but it’s normal
And now it becomes completely absurd.
You sound like you’re form r/firefox on Reddit. They’ll all vehemently deny that Mozilla survives on Google Money.
> About 87% of Mozilla’s total revenue comes from royalties. The organization renewed its search engine contract with Google in 2020 for three years.
> They are independent.
LOL, no comment.
Add to this baseless claims of a non-profit organization supposedly having loads of reserves when they already had to announce substantial layoffs due to financial difficulties. Further, some baseless claim that other search engines would be interest in Firefox’s address bar when all competitors basically know that users would switch that back to Google anyway hahahaha. Also, this guy does not believe that the alternative to the Google revenue is Firefox selling services to users where they have the ability to compromise user privacy (e.g. VPN).
* [Editor: removed]
> how can something work that I don’t want to work!
Welcome back! Firefox is here to stay.
> Firefox is here to stay.
Of course it’s here to stay, Google needs the pseudo-competition after all.
If you can call 4% market share “stay”, that is.
Like clockwork to the rescue!
How did you you become so indoctrinated? Did you do it to yourself or others did it to you?
Things are not as black and white as you imagine. Mozilla is Google’s lapdog, they exist because Google pays them for their users’ data. Essentially Mozilla and Firefox exist because Google allows them to.
Firefox is almost dead (and it’s a good thing), so they are no competition to Google.
@Jek Teno and @Iron Heart
I was referred information form a Bugzilla post on the future of Firefox support on Windows 7.
Pertinent to this blog post, look how many times Mozilla staff references what Google is doing with Chrome. Mozilla realizes that they have a “leader” or at the very least “trend-setter” to follow. They are unable to make their own executive decision on the matter.
Google need a non-Chromium browser out there to damp down talk of monopoly in that arena.
Considering the general purposes to be used, to release a new engine is not as easy as it seems, however it should be a good idea to rebuilt Google with some kind of 100% backwards compatibility with all kind of browsing requirements. By the way the User Agents are no longer “needed” or also are too old in their environment (i.e., what’s is Mozilla 5.0?).
> By the way the User Agents are no longer “needed” or also are too old in their environment (i.e., what’s is Mozilla 5.0?).
User agents will always be needed – for backward compatibility reasons. “Mozilla 5.0” is not the version number of the browser. The user agent of Firefox 107, for example, is:
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:107.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/107.0
“Mozilla 5.0” has to be there for compatibility reasons, it’s used by *every* browser. Please use Google or another search engine to find the history behind this. You will find explanations that are better than my explanation would be.
@Tom, user agents can be spoofed and anyway websites can detect the real browser UA.
John G. not sure how rebuilding Google’s engine is related to Mozilla’s revenue. But anyways, it has already happened: they replaced Blink’s legacy layout engine (which was based on WebKit) with LayoutNG.
BTW, User Agents are needed: removing them is not web compatible. It doesn’t matter that they can be spoofed.
Time to merge with ugly g
I’m more curious about how many users they’re losing annually to other browsers. Any statistics about that?
Apparently not that many: https://data.firefox.com/dashboard/user-activity
But still losing users, which is good, Firefox should die ASAP.
Sounds like you know everything I don’t know, will you tell me what browser you use, for a future reference?
It is here to stay :)
Well, I guess all those people who say they’re dumping firefox actually didn’t. There’s a slow delcine in active users but not as great as I thought.
I’m stuck on 91esr at present as the constant re-inventing of the UI has created problems that I’ve not been able to solve. Already having problems with some websites telling me browser is not supported. If I can’t resolve the issues, I’m going to have to switch browsers whether I want to or not.
What peeves me with mozilla is the constant change of things that don’t really need to change, the lack of testing and the “microsoft complex” (We will tell you what you want and you will be happy, oh… and you will eat ze bugs”).
Wonder how many employees Mozilla will cut after this and how much more of a bonus the CEO will take for herself.
They hiring (a lot) since about a year.
> About 87% of Mozilla’s total revenue comes from royalties.
> They are independent.
* [Editor: removed]
binocry more indeed!
Mozilla is doing its best, not easy to balance. Happy their revenue increased for period 2021, hoping maybe naively that one day they’ll be able to make it without Google : there must be a way to achieve this when so much money is potentially available, to do it without any compensation that is which seriously reduces the spectrum. Personally I like Mozilla, its philosophy, its efforts, its browser.
By the way, to answer the article’s question : I use none of Mozilla’s other services simply because I have no use for them or because I already use comparable services.
Whether we like/use or not Mozilla products, its browser to start with, I’m emphasizing on the idea that it participates as others to competition and whether I’d like/love/adore/worship Google products I wouldn’t wish any company’s monopole now and in the future.
Very well stated, I share the same sentiments.
Exactly. I dislike Mozilla management for all the bad things they are doing to Firefox, but I still use and promote Firefox to counter the monopoly of Chrome that Google controls.
I actually still like Firefox more than Chromne.
Chrome messes up the formatting of text that you copy from a webpage, and does not have a handy persistant bar to search a webpage like Firefox does.
Firefox also have it’s own OS independant TLS certificates storage, that you can manage independantly in each Firefox profile you make.
The better financial result (for now) has come at the costs of firing developers.
The worry is what new stupid ideas they wil get to make Firefox worse.
Firefox has to stay. The current Mozilla management has to go.
And there are still many, sometimes even involved as benevolent development contributors or as donators, who still believe a fable that Mozilla would be a friendly charity organization working mainly from donations for the greater good, and not a giant for profit and de facto Google department receiving money almost exclusively from Google (half a billion a year) in exchange for selling personal and intimate search data to them (officially) and for being nothing but an obedient Google appendix in charge of normalizing the hostile technological surveillance nightmare we’re now living in (in practice).
It’s also worth reminding that the excuse for Mozilla’s own abundant surveillance experiments such as with Pocket, to be “independent” from Google, was clearly nothing but a farce.
This is exciting to say the least. For me the biggest improvement I’ve noticed is in Firefox Android. I’m using my phone more than ever, despite all the privacy issues that comes with smartphone, and it works as flawlessly as ever and better than any Chromium browser out there.
> I’m using my phone more than ever, despite all the privacy issues that comes with smartphone
Ever heard of GrapheneOS?
> Firefox Android (…) it works as flawlessly as ever and better than any Chromium browser out there.
Its reviews on the Play Store don’t seem to indicate such. Its users generally think it sucks.
Also, better than Chromium: :…………D In your dreams, maybe.
‘Its reviews on the Play Store don’t seem to indicate such. Its users generally think it sucks.’
Don’t take majority of reviews of anything seriously man. Most of them are just spreading nonsense. Firefox’s Fenix isn’t as good as Fennec, atleast official Firefox for Android. But Fennec, Mull, Iceraven, Firefox Nightly, Beta – all are equivalent to Fennec.
‘Also, better than Chromium: :…………D In your dreams, maybe.’
Agreed on disagreement.
‘Ever heard of GrapheneOS?’
Recently bought a Moto phone, Pixel is not worth it in my opinion. No GrapheneOS available for that. Only three Google apps – System Webview, Play services and Maps. No Google sign-in. F-Droid(mostly) and Aurora Store are go-to app stores. Even if I had bought a Pixel, apps would’ve remained same on GrapheneOS except maybe Vanadium would’ve replaced default Android System Webview.
> Don’t take majority of reviews of anything seriously man.
And I don’t take views like this seriously. People take the time to write bad reviews for a reason, and when it happens en masse, you generally just have a shitty product to offer. However, even without the reviews, the very zealots on r/firefox admit that it’s subpar compared to the desktop version. If even they admit it, what is left to discuss there?
> Recently bought a Moto phone, Pixel is not worth it in my opinion.
Pixel has the best hardware security including a relockable bootloader, which is the main reason why GrapheneOS supports only Google Pixel models – Motorola is whatever. Also, on the Pixel, even by default you “only” have the Google spying, with Motorola you have the Google spying + whatever spying Motorola does:
Unless you have a model that can run LineageOS, you have made a big mistake privacy-wise. Btw, GrapheneOS has zero Google spying by default.
> Only three Google apps – System Webview, Play services and Maps. No Google sign-in.
The majority of Google’s spying on Android happens via the Google Play Services, and you have that installed, correct? End of the road as far as privacy is concerned, for the most part.
By the way, at least check out GMaps WV (WebView) on F-Droid, this is better than Google Maps from a privacy perspective:
> Even if I had bought a Pixel, apps would’ve remained same on GrapheneOS except maybe Vanadium would’ve replaced default Android System Webview.
Vanadium is better than Chrome WV by definition because Vanadium stripped out all Google tracking by default. GMaps WV can replace Maps without Play Services. Play Services are only “needed” if some other app strictly requires them and even then, they don’t have the usual deep-rooted permissions on GrapheneOS, they only have the permissions of an ordinary app.
The smartphone I’m using is my primary device. I need cab apps. GMapsWV isn’t cut for the job. Google Maps is needed otherwise cab apps don’t work, not even one. I also have bank apps for online payment for which I need Google Play services. Even GrapheneOS integrated Play services coz some apps need it. Sure in GrapheneOS there is sandbox to limit Play services but main point is it just can’t be replaced. Not even with microG.
Moto phones probably have least amount of bloatware and Google spying. They don’t receive updates Google sends specifically for Pixel devices nor do they have exclusive Google features – again privacy nightmare. Moto phones receive security updates and that’s it.
You can also relock bootloader if you want in Moto since it is stock Android. No Samsung style shenanigans here.
And yes it can run LineageOS or any other custom ROM because again stock Android.
I’m not using Google sign-in and never will. Not all’s lost when it comes to privacy.
As for reviews, I wouldn’t even take majority of negative Brave browser seriously and I don’t even use Brave. End of story. Unless reviews are well written and problem is explained in detail, I consider them fake which rules out most.
Is this how a nonprofit works?
That’s interesting, I wonder if the increased income is because more people were remote working last year, and were therefore spending more time online? If true, then probably the other browsers with similar market share like Brave and Vivaldi saw increased revenues also. Maybe even Pale Moon with its DuckDuckGo partnership made more in 2021. I wonder if Seamonkey and Netsurf have search partner deals? They should.
A rising tide should lift all boats.
For many pc extension support firefox is better. I used ungoogled chromium portable and download a lot of extension. But when i tried this portable ungoogled chrome in different pc, all my ext were gone. This is for every chrome based browser. But for firefox all the ext are working even in different pc. So i like chrome interface but now useing firefox as default browser.
I have the same experience. This is another reason I like Firefox more than Chrome.
Good news. I use Firefox and prefer it over Chrome, Edge and Vivaldi. Mozilla made some debatable “improvements” in the browser and relies on the spying G sponsor, so it gets much hate, but Firefox definitely has its advantages and striving to survive where competition is so huge means that sometimes you need cooperate with the stronger and less privacy-respecting guys. Firefox, keep getting fatter, don’t leave the forrest.
@Tom; @Cor Invectus
“Mozilla has financial reserves for a few years.”
Not true according to the Financial Report:
“2021 cash flow = $374,048; 2021 Expenses = $388,981”
The audit indicates Mozilla is financially distressed; the 2022 global economic decline may be financially devastating to Mozilla.
Mozilla continues to alienate users:
“How many users they’re losing annually to other browsers. Any statistics about that?”
“Firefox was on a roll toward the end of 2008. Mozilla’s browser was used by 20% of the 1.5 billion individuals who were online at the time. Moreover, half of all internet users in Indonesia, Macedonia, and Slovenia used Firefox.”
“From the beginning of 2019 to the beginning of 2022, Mozilla’s own figures show a loss of about 30 million monthly active users. A significant flattening is clearly visible in the last couple of years.”
Global Market share:
Firefox = 3%
Chrome = 65%
Mozilla needs a sponsor, someone like Warren Buffett, not Google.
Obviously, Mozilla management isn’t in tune with financial business innovation. Google proves to be an unreliable source of income. Advertising isn’t working. New features aren’t popular:
“I use none of Mozilla’s other services simply because I have no use for them or because I already use comparable services”
The best Mozilla can hope for now is an increase in users; users who like and use Firefox daily need to support Mozilla and convert Chrome users by expressing the UI finesse, diplomacy [users do have a say in development, and Mozilla does listen], and security of the Firefox platform.
If a user can readily show the security and privacy issues inherent in Chrome, then users will gradually migrate to Firefox which is known for privacy and security and user adaptability.
My guess is more users will migrate to Edge before trying Firefox much like users are inclined to use OneDrive before using some other storage service. Edge and OneDrive are integrated into the Windows OS, and running a third party program seems counterintuitive to IT staff and consumer users.
For whatever reason, many people liken the use of Firefox to the use of Linux. It’s alien and unfamiliar to them, so the browser seems unsafe, insecure, and an affront to privacy.
It’s all about “perception.” Only positive articles and comments can change that perception.
> “Mozilla continues to alienate users […]”
> “Global Market share: […]’
> “Only positive articles and comments can change that perception”
I’m not sure all this is coherent. When a comment is initiated by a specific feature promotion or comparison then it can be but positive given reported facts are correct, but when the comment obviously fits in a deliberate judgement — most of the time fed by general assumptions promoting our favorite by devaluing the other – then we are closer to a fan’s boy attitude. I have in mind a society’s clash sometimes even defined as quasi civil when it comes to it’s presidency. Hey : we’re not all Americans but we certainly all are Netizens : I’m always surprised by the intensity, the drama of certain dialogs. Good Lord …
I prefer to evoke what I like and dislike about a browser I use and when it comes to Firefox emphasize on the fact that hitting it until it dies is not a worthy contribution to healthy competition. Refusing a fan’s attitude also means that there is no hysteria, no sentimentalism, no duty, no mariage : if Firefox passes away we’ll switch to a browser as close as possible to what Firefox has brought us for years. Period. For sure I evoke only Firefox simply because I use no other browser, not because i’d hate any other or consider all others are unworthy. I jut like Firefox and say it, never say it’s the best, try to bring my contribution on specific technical issues or features, but you’ll notice that i’ve never expressed hatred or even reported hate comments about other browsers (companies behind is another problem and then revolt but no hatred) : no fan attitude, no love, no hatred. To like is my limit and i think this is a worthy attitude when it comes to what is in fact but products, services, digital, cyber …. whilst compassion, deep feelings are reserved for true life in a true world, not elsewhere, not here.
Do you think that engineers from Google adopt a fan attitude with engineers from other companies? They must laugh about their fans’ attitudes. They compete, but smartly, not like kids.
“I jut like Firefox and say it, never say it’s the best, try to bring my contribution to specific technical issues or features.”
Agreed. I use Firefox because I like it and find it more privacy and security oriented than other browsers. I only say that because of numerous articles stating such is the case with examples far beyond my technical understanding. In that case, I am trusting the research of the writers. I know many will say the Brave browser is the best, or some other. I haven’t read any research to support the claims.
As for promoting a Firefox “fan club,” that’s not really an intent. The idea/intent is much as you say, if someone asks, share: “I use Firefox because and have a few facts at hand–issues with Google and MS privacy and problems with security. Then, maybe, provide an easy link for reference:
IT Departments are burdened enough with other issues, so picking a browser is a default choice: Whatever comes with the system. That is the only reason I suspect Edge will eventually become a browser of choice. What one uses at work will be used at home.
Example: Public schools that use the Chromebooks will be using Chrome; those using the Surface Laptop SE will be using Edge. Students will then need to use Chrome at home or Edge.
I rarely find a government or business IT Department that has taken the time to install Firefox or Brave. I rarely find a government or business IT Department that has taken the time to install a few privacy extensions on Chrome or Edge.
Big question: “Mozilla’s browser was used by 20% of the 1.5 billion individuals.”
What happened in four short years? Now 3%.
> What happened in four short years?
People don’t really “think”. To them the round icon is “the internet”, when it is actually just the web. They don’t care how to access it. They just use what annoys them the least. If being signed in 24/7 into a google account and using Chrome is what it takes to get not pestered by Google popups when on Firefox @ Youtube they will do it.
They are unable to help themselves. The average joe is not tech savvy.
> “What happened in four short years? Now 3%.”
And so what? Those of us who are speculating on a browser’s future, or implicitly/explicitly stating that a product’s quality is proportional to its market share, or bounce on this share to explicitly this time adopt a fan attitude all in love and hatred have the right to of course.
Analysis is an area of certitude when reporting facts (beware though of fake facts, bad source=likely wrong facts and good sources themselves may diverge in what they report) but a zone of speculation when attempting to make them speak, especially about their implication for tomorrows.
Americans in particular have this tendance to consider reality in terms of probabilities, the 9/11 drama had been reported by intelligence analysts as potential but wiped as impossible on the ground of low probabilities, and innocents have been sentenced to death on that basis, and not only in America. We live in a word hungry of certitudes, which worships them and considers doubt as the signature of uneducated minds.
Take the example of a user who’s the only one (market share = 0+%) to run an application he’s crafted for himself : he doesn’t give a damn about the market share, does he? You see, what bothers me is this attempt to correlate the number of users to the quality of a product, in the same way to correlate a product’s quality to its advertisement, believing more money is spent on advertising it better is the product and vice versa. What bothers me even more is an an audience’s commitment to such attempts with the snow-ball effect : the popularity/trend dialectic. What the heck?
I remain convinced that if we all focus on the present, on tangible facts, free of a club/fan mentality then its for the benefit of all. from there on, free world, free speech and, I hope, free thoughts and reasoning.
Well up until the release of Quantum, Firefox was the slowest browser. Then Mozilla alienated a lot of people by making what seemed to be political statements, then they also made statements that seemed to contradict the goal of having a free and open web which alienated more people. Basically there are several factors over the years contributing to their decline.
What statements are those? What politics exactly?
Given how Firefox is developing, they might as well join forces with Google at this point. Duplicating Chrome and eliminating helpful features damaged the UX and UI. My userchrome script is destroyed in every version.
> My userchrome script is destroyed in every version.
There is Firefox ESR, you know. This version destroys your modifications “only” once per year.