Serious warnings 1 confirmed warning, and users report 2 more things. Checked: 900 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 24.0.1 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-27 .
The store currently lists version 24.0.1, updated 2026-09-29.
This analysis describes version 24.1 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-26 .
The store currently lists version 24.1, updated 2026-10-07.
Store screenshots supplied by the developer.
Are you struggling to stay on top of tasks and appointments? Is it difficult to meet deadlines, even when you know they're important? Does a lack of organization leave you feeling overwhelmed and unaccomplished?
Conquer the chaos and embrace a more focused and organized life with Clarify, the ultimate time management app designed for individuals who struggle with focus, time blindness, and executive functioning, or anyone who wants to improve their executive functioning skills.
In a world buzzing with distractions, where time slips away like sand through your fingers, you're about to embark on the quest of a lifetime. You're setting out to conquer what many deem impossible, mastering the realms of focus and time management.
Do you find you have problems with:
- Focus?
- Procrastination?
- Starting tasks?
- Follow through?
- Relationships?
- Organization?
- Impulse control?…
From the developer’s store description.
For developers and the curious
The evidence, sources, measurements and versions behind every label above.
Findings that met the published evidence standard.
Surprise charges: raised by 43 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 12 reviews we read)
A large number of reviewers report being charged when they did not expect it — including being charged after cancelling during a free trial, or when a trial turned into a paid plan without warning. We cannot see anyone's billing, so this is published as an attributed user report: what reviewers say, and how many of them said it.
Specific evidence of a useful property, within the stated scope.
The developer's store data-safety disclosure states that data deletion can be requested; we have not seen a deletion control in the app's own text
The developer's data-safety disclosure on the store states that users can request deletion of their data, or the app's own text offers a way to delete the account. This restates what the developer declares; it is not a test of whether deletion works. Apple publishes no equivalent disclosure, so on an Apple-only listing only the app's own text can support it.
Open observations that have not cleared the evidence bar.
Trial converts to a charge: raised by 17 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 29 reviews we read)
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
The free trial demands a payment method up front and/or rolls into a paid subscription with no usable warning.
Hard to cancel: raised by 22 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 23 reviews we read)
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
Cancelling the subscription is blocked, hidden, multi-step, or simply does not take effect.
The store privacy disclosure (5 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.
900 reviews read for this analysis. Each observation keeps the sample and store it was based on.
Raised by 43 distinct reviewers — about 1 in 12 reviews we read on this store leg (App Store).
Be careful downloading any of this company's apps. They are a scam. Even after you cancel, they continue to charge your account. I've been back and forth with them for nearly a month and never receive the same answer or a refund
Awful. I thought I had only signed up to the 14.99 trial and realised 4 payments over £100 had come out of my account in recent months without my knowledge. Rang my bank thinking it was fraud. Now have no idea how to contact Clarify…
First off, you're not getting your refund. they charge you immediately, and the refund process is confusing and frustrating. Google Play won't refund you either. The app is nothing special, honestly. Most of the resources are AI generated…
I am absolutely furious. This app is nothing but a scam. It needs removing from the playstore. It is predatory. I signed up for the free trial for (said it would be 89p) and now I have a charge of £34.99 to my account. As soon as I…
Scam. Don't download. Tried to charge me £40 when my trial was still a month away from ending. Signed me up to additional 'premium' and 'bundle' subscriptions without my consent. Have gone online and seen multiple horror stories of people…
This app is a total scam, I signed up for the free trial and it later charged me £30, as well as an additional £30 for other apps I didn't sign up for.
total scam stay away. it's a family of apps and they sign you up for 5-6 app trials at once. they ask for your credit card info so it's impossible to stop the subscription via Google Play store. you also can't cancel the subscription via…
Scam, they make it extremely difficult to cancel your trial, if you disconnect your payment option they will pester you for months after you've canceled as if you didn't. The app itself was a bloated mess of different shallow methods that…
predatory scam - trying to cancel premium membership after trial generated an error every time. Couldn't cancel and they tried to charge my credit card. DO NOT USE Update (Oct 23). They continue to try to charge me. I get emails every…
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 24.0.1 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-27 .
The store currently lists version 24.0.1, updated 2026-09-29.
This analysis describes version 24.1 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-26 .
The store currently lists version 24.1, updated 2026-10-07.
Each store’s release notes, as the developer wrote them. They are the developer’s words, not ours.
We’ve streamlined a few things to help you concentrate on what matters most. This update brings minor bug fixes and performance enhancements so nothing can get between you and your deep focus!
No release notes were provided for this version.
Appworthy
clarifyAssessed 2026-10-27 from 900 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.