Some warnings 5 users report the basics being behind a paywall. Nothing confirmed. Checked: 138 reviews, the store listing and the privacy label.
From our automated analysis, 27 Oct 2026. Every label links to its evidence in the full report below.
This analysis describes version 1.7.6 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-27 .
The store currently lists version 1.7.6, updated 2026-10-12.
Store screenshots supplied by the developer.
THE ULTIMATE AI FOOD & FITNESS TRACKER
Amino is the easiest (and most fun) calorie tracking app! Snap a photo or scan a barcode, and let our AI do the rest. See the nutritional breakdown, check the Health Score, then log it and keep going! Track your steps & activities, participate in fun daily challenges, and earn real rewards.
Plus, Amino is LOADED with features to help you reach your health goals:
- Log Meals with AI
- Track Steps & Activities
- Barcode Scanner
- Personal AI Coach
- Detailed Nutrition Info
- Health Score
- Intermittent Fasting
- Water Tracking
- Streak Bonuses
- Personal Nutrition Insights
- Fun Daily Challenges
- Weekly Contests
- Monthly Sweepstakes
- and more!
Download Amino for FREE and join the 150,000+ happy users that have logged 6.5+ million meals!
Have a question? Email us at [email protected]…
From the developer’s store description.
For developers and the curious
The evidence, sources, measurements and versions behind every label above.
Open observations that have not cleared the evidence bar.
Paywall blocks the basics: raised by 5 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 28 reviews we read)
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
The core of the app — not extras — sits behind payment, or previously-free function moved behind a paywall.
Nothing was published as a thing to watch for in this assessment. That is not a finding that nothing is wrong with the app.
138 reviews read for this analysis. Each observation keeps the sample and store it was based on.
He used to be good. I officially hate it — When they had less, and they gave less to the consumer of the app, I’ve been using it loyalty since the beginning, I even created my first real review on this app at the time, I believed it was…
Weekly caloric tracker — I have used this app over a couple of months and I am very fond of the features it has. However, the recent update added a paywall onto some of the basic features an app should have like telling your average…
No longer good — Can’t get the app to work at all. It used to be free. Now I’m getting a paywall for everything. Looks like I’ll be deleting this app soon.
A sampled review illustrates one person’s experience. It does not establish a finding on its own.
“Not assessed” means we could not measure it. It is never a zero and never a pass.
No package has been scanned for this app, so nothing is published about what it ships. That is an absence of evidence, not a finding.
Supporting measurements: not a complete list of possible harms or positives. Measurement vocabulary 1.4 · how these are measured
This analysis describes version 1.7.6 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-27 .
The store currently lists version 1.7.6, updated 2026-10-12.
Each store’s release notes, as the developer wrote them. They are the developer’s words, not ours.
- Keep your streak going with a smoother, more reliable Amino
Appworthy
aminoAssessed 2026-10-27 from 138 user reviews, the store listing and its privacy label. We have not scanned the app's package, so nothing on this page was read from inside the app itself.
What the stores publish. Store ratings are the stores’ numbers, not Appworthy’s, and are never averaged across stores.
From the store listing. Billing terms are read from each purchase’s name — the stores don’t publish them — so treat them as a strong hint, not a disclosure.
These are really on sale; we just can’t tell from the name whether they recur.
This assessment is produced automatically. Three independent signals are read — user reviews, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure — and each candidate finding is filed under the sources that support it.
No charge stands on one kind of evidence — with one published exception. A finding is either a measured fact that anyone can reproduce (an ad SDK is in the package; every subscription bills weekly; the privacy label omits a tracker we can see), or it is an interpretation — and an interpretation needs independent sources to agree before it reaches the catch list. The exception is a harm only users can see: a charge may publish from reviews alone, as “Reported by N users”, once enough reviewers raise it to clear that charge’s own published bar. That agreement rule is what replaced the human reviewer, not a model’s confidence.
There is no overall score, on purpose. A 0–99 number was published here until 2026-09-15. It was withdrawn because it discriminated too weakly to be the instrument — 44.7% of every pair of apps tied — and because a single number is a verdict where a count is an observation. What publishes instead is a row of measurements, each of which says what was counted and, where we could not look, says that instead.
Findings under One source only are real reports we do not stand behind as findings. They are shown because withholding them entirely would hide a genuine complaint, and labelled because publishing them as charges would be an accusation off a single source.
Write to [email protected], or use the form. Name the finding, the app version and the evidence that needs correcting. Factual corrections are free and never depend on buying anything.