Some warnings 9 users report the basics being behind a paywall. Nothing confirmed. Checked: 500 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 5.2.4 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-27 .
The store currently lists version 5.2.4, updated 2026-10-24.
Store screenshots supplied by the developer.
SIMPLE, EASY & FAST CALORIE COUNTING
Calory is your ultimate calorie counter and a quick way to count, track & tally your calories during the day.
WHY COUNT CALORIES?
Everyone has a personalized number of calories they should eat every day based on factors including their weight, height, activity levels, and weight loss/maintenance/gain goals. It’s hard to track calorie intake, though, not least because it’s easy to forget everything you eat during a busy day. Recording your calories as you eat gives you a clearer picture of the calories you are consuming. It also enhances your awareness of food values and nutrient levels, all of which helps you make healthier choices when eating.
HOW CALORY WORKS
Based on your weight, height and activity level, Calory will calculate a suggested daily calorie goal for you.…
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 9 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 56 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.
Reviewers report clear pricing: raised by 10 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 50 reviews we read)
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
The app's own text offers a one-time or lifetime purchase, or reviewers report that the price is stated clearly.
The store privacy disclosure (2 entries) links no contact details or identifiers to the user — consistent with an app that does not require an account. Self-reported by the developer.
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
The app's own screens offer a way past sign-up — guest access, skipping, or browsing before registering — rather than gating the product behind an account. The store's privacy disclosure is checked alongside it: that disclosure is self-reported, so it corroborates this credit rather than establishing it.
Nothing was published as a thing to watch for in this assessment. That is not a finding that nothing is wrong with the app.
500 reviews read for this analysis. Each observation keeps the sample and store it was based on.
I don’t want to put in my card to use the app. It was free to use. — Why would you do that. It WAS the best tracker. Why does EVERYTHING require a subscription these days? Esp when the features were previously FREE.
It does not let to use this app for free at all — So I got the app and started to log in and then it popped up a 7 day free trial that you can’t skip I tried to but no it makes you subscribe otherwise you can’t use the app I even agreed…
Literally cannot use it without signing up for paid — Free trial sure but auto renews to a paid membership and you can’t use it or even try without setting up an auto recurring payment. Dumbest thing I’ve seen and I’m a decade like pro…
Most simple calorie app — Love how simple it is. Love that they offered me a lifetime deal. I’m happy to pay for such a great app. Thanks so much!!
macro tracker ? — i love calorie, but what would make it even better is if i could use the macro tracker for a one time payment rather than a monthly fee
love this app — bought the premium a few years ago with a one-time purchase and i've never gone back!
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 5.2.4 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-27 .
The store currently lists version 5.2.4, updated 2026-10-24.
Each store’s release notes, as the developer wrote them. They are the developer’s words, not ours.
Calory Version 5.2.4 • Made for iPhone Duo: Home, History, Settings, Sharing and more use the big unfolded screen (iOS 27.1). • More Liquid Glass on iOS 26, including a redesigned History. • Bug fixes and performance improvements
Calory 5.2 is here! • Made for iPhone Duo: Home, History, Settings, Sharing and more use the big unfolded screen (iOS 27.1). • More Liquid Glass on iOS 26, including a redesigned History.
Appworthy
calorie-counter-apple-1441252752Assessed 2026-10-27 from 500 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.
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.