Some warnings 9 users report a free trial turning into a charge; 11 users report the basics being behind a paywall. Nothing confirmed. Checked: 547 reviews, the store listing and the privacy label.
From our automated analysis, 26 Oct 2026. Every label links to its evidence in the full report below.
This analysis describes version 9.3.34 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-26 .
The store currently lists version 9.3.34, updated 2026-10-22.
Store screenshots supplied by the developer.
Join the HUD™ casual dating community and meet more than 20 million open-minded adult singles worldwide.
HUD™ - Revolution in Casual Dating
HUD™ App is a casual dating app that is honest about the realities of online dating. A safe space for like-minded people to connect, and explore dating freely.
Whether you're new to open relationships or simply looking to explore dating on your own terms, HUD App provides an inclusive, respectful and empowering experience for anyone wanting to meet new people without pressure.
We believe dating should be fun, flexible, and transparent — and that you should be able to express yourself freely while feeling safe and respected. HUD App is designed to help you explore relationships in a judgment-free space where honesty, consent and communication come first.
Find and connect with locals…
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.
Trial converts to a charge: raised by 9 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 61 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.
Paywall blocks the basics: raised by 11 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 50 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.
547 reviews read for this analysis. Each observation keeps the sample and store it was based on.
A bonafide scam — App deliberately generates false ‘free trial’ advertisements to lure unsuspecting consumers bsck on the app, then charges them. They will continue to solicit ‘free weekly trials’ again and again , over and over, even…
Scam — In the app it asks if you want to signup for a one week free trial and then it immediately charges you for $20.
DON’T ACCEPT THE TRIAL — Don’t accept the trial period. They’ll offer is as a 7 day free trial but will charge you just a couple days after you start. It already isn’t a very active app, throw in the straight up deceitful tactics they use…
This app is a waste of time — If you don’t pay you will not be matched! You can’t do anything on this app without paying. And even if you do it will show you the same people over and over, who will never see your profile anyway! Dont bother
Wack — I got one match and she didn’t respond after saying hi. Then everything else is behind a paywall. I do mean everything can’t see who liked your profile nor viewed it either. Can’t message without matching because if you do it while…
Great app — Honestly a great app, but it feels like you cant do anything without premium, like most dating apps.
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 9.3.34 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-26 .
The store currently lists version 9.3.34, updated 2026-10-22.
Each store’s release notes, as the developer wrote them. They are the developer’s words, not ours.
We update HUD™ regularly to make it faster and more reliable for you. This update includes bug fixes and performance enhancements.
We update HUD™ regularly to make it faster and more reliable for you. This update includes bug fixes and performance enhancements.
We update HUD™ regularly to make it faster and more reliable for you. This update includes bug fixes and performance enhancements.
Appworthy
hudtm-dating-appAssessed 2026-10-26 from 547 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.