/

Swift Development

WAYF: Swift Development for iOS agency

WAYF: Swift Development for iOS agency

React Native handles most mobile projects well. One codebase, two platforms, faster iteration. We've shipped dozens of cross-platform apps and we'll recommend that path more often than not.
But iOS has corners that cross-platform can't always reach.
WAYF builds native iOS when native iOS is genuinely necessary. We're not a Swift-first shop, and that's the point. We reach for it deliberately, after evaluating whether cross-platform would serve you better.

Start Your Project

Start Your Project

Start Your Project

What We Build

Native iOS applications where the platform matters. Apps with deep Apple ecosystem integration — health data, home automation, watch companions, CarPlay interfaces. Performance-critical experiences where React Native's bridge would introduce unacceptable latency. Apps that need capabilities Apple reserves for native code.

Native modules for React Native apps that hit platform limits. The cross-platform core stays cross-platform; the piece that needs direct iOS access gets built properly in Swift and bridged cleanly.

SDK and framework work. Libraries meant to be consumed by other iOS developers, where Swift conventions and API design matter as much as functionality.

What we don't build: apps that would ship fine with React Native. If one codebase covering iOS and Android meets your requirements — and it usually does — that's what we'll recommend. Native iOS means maintaining a separate codebase, often hiring iOS-specific talent later, and accepting that features ship per-platform instead of simultaneously. Worth it sometimes. Not worth it often.

Patterns We've Seen Fail

Native by default. Someone decided early that quality means native. Now there are two codebases, two teams, two release cycles. Features ship weeks apart. Bug fixes happen twice. The maintenance burden compounds quarterly. Sometimes this is the right tradeoff. Usually it's an assumption nobody stress-tested.

Swift written like Objective-C. Old habits carried forward. Delegates everywhere. Protocols used for everything whether they help or not. Optionals force-unwrapped instead of handled properly. The code runs, but it fights the language instead of using it.

SwiftUI adoption at the wrong time. SwiftUI is clearly Apple's future. It's also still maturing. We've seen teams rewrite working UIKit apps because SwiftUI seemed cleaner, then spend months on workarounds for things UIKit handled easily. New projects, yes. Rewrites, usually no.

Ignoring the ecosystem. iOS development means more than writing Swift. It means provisioning profiles, code signing, TestFlight, App Store review, in-app purchase rules, privacy nutrition labels. Teams focused only on code get surprised by everything around it.

We've inherited all of these. We'd rather help you avoid them.

Technical Approach

SwiftUI for New Projects, with Caveats

We think it's the right direction and we're productive in it. But we know where the edges are — where UIKit is still more capable, where SwiftUI's declarative model fights what you're trying to build. We use SwiftUI by default and UIKit where it's smarter.

Architecture that Assumes Change

MVVM as a baseline. Clear separation between views, business logic, and data. Dependencies injected, not hardcoded. The goal is code that a different team could pick up in a year without archaeology.

Architecture that Assumes Change

MVVM as a baseline. Clear separation between views, business logic, and data. Dependencies injected, not hardcoded. The goal is code that a different team could pick up in a year without archaeology.

Concurrency Done Right

Swift's async/await and actors are genuinely good. We use them. We also know where the sharp edges are — where structured concurrency helps and where it creates problems. Not every async operation needs an actor; not every actor needs to be global.

Testing that Catches Real Problems

Unit tests for logic. UI tests for critical paths. Integration tests where boundaries matter. We don't chase coverage numbers; we optimize for catching bugs before your users do.

Testing that Catches Real Problems

Unit tests for logic. UI tests for critical paths. Integration tests where boundaries matter. We don't chase coverage numbers; we optimize for catching bugs before your users do.

The Apple Ecosystem as a Whole

CloudKit when it fits. Combine where it helps. App Clips, widgets, extensions when they serve the product. We think about what iOS offers, not just what Swift can do.

Working With Us

Two modes.

You have an iOS team and need senior help. We integrate. Your architecture, your patterns, your tools. We ship code and point out where things could be stronger.

You need someone to own it. We lead. Architecture decisions. Code review standards. Release process. We build the thing and leave you with something maintainable — documented, tested, ready for whoever comes next.

Constant regardless: direct feedback. If React Native would serve you better, we say so before we write Swift. If a feature request doesn't justify native complexity, same. We'd rather lose a project than build the wrong thing and watch you pay for it later.

Good Fit

You have a genuine reason for native iOS. Performance, ecosystem integration, App Store requirements — something concrete, not just a preference.

You're open to hearing that cross-platform might be the better path. Some of our best engagements ended with React Native apps that shipped faster and cost less than the native build the client originally planned.

You want a team that thinks about what you're building, not just how. Product questions. Scope questions. Whether this feature is worth the complexity.

Poor Fit

You've already committed to native iOS and don't want that revisited. A pure iOS shop will know edge cases we don't. Our value is in the broader view — when native is right, when it isn't, and how to mix approaches when that's smarter.

You're comparing agencies on rate alone. We won't win on price. We win on not rebuilding things in six months.

You need parity between iOS and Android and want native for both. Possible, but expensive and slow. Usually the answer is React Native with native modules where needed. If you're certain about dual-native, we'll have that conversation — but we'll push back.

Compounding Trust

Founders, CTOs, and Procurement Officers choose WAYF.
Hundreds of 0 → 1 launches · Fortune 500 partnerships · Global public institution contracts

Founders, CTOs, and Procurement Officers choose WAYF. Hundreds of 0 → 1 launches · Fortune 500 partnerships · Global public institution contracts

Client spotlight

Client spotlight

Client spotlight

Client spotlight

Client spotlight

Client spotlight

Council of Europe Development Bank

Billions of Euros in capital deployed each year to support social cohesion.

View Case Study ->

A grid background image

Council of Europe Development Bank

Billions of Euros in capital deployed each year to support social cohesion.

View Case Study ->

A grid background image

Fortune 500:
Ingersoll Rand

Worldwide manufacturer and distributor of unrivalled compressed air solutions.

View Case Study ->

A grid background image

Fortune 500: Ingersoll Rand

Worldwide manufacturer and distributor of unrivalled compressed air solutions.

View Case Study ->

A grid background image

View more clients

View more clients

View more clients

View more clients

View more clients

View more clients

Let's talk

Let's talk

Building something that might need native iOS — or might not?

Have a Swift codebase that needs senior attention?

Building something that might need native iOS — or might not?

Have a Swift codebase
that needs senior attention?

Fill Contact Form

Fill Contact Form

Fill Contact Form

Book Free Consult  •  25min

Book Free Consult  •  25min

Book Free Consult  •  25min