Some warnings 11 users report the basics being behind a paywall; 6 users report ads that misrepresent the app. 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 6.6.3 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-27 .
The store currently lists version 6.6.3, updated 2026-10-25.
Store screenshots supplied by the developer.
Meet Life Reset — a self-improvement app that turns your real goals into daily quests, XP, and streaks. We make building better habits feel less like a chore and more like a game you actually want to show up for.
Over 1.5 million people have already started their arc with Life Reset. Ready to begin yours?
Life Reset requires a subscription to unlock all features.
——————
HOW YOU START
To start, Life Reset guides you through a personal onboarding:
• Science-Backed Habit Insights — Answer a few questions about your lifestyle and goals, and get tailored recommendations grounded in behavioral science.
• Personalized Assessment — Receive a detailed breakdown of your strengths, blind spots, and where to focus first.
• Custom Program Generation — Get a habit program built around your life, ready to follow from day one.
——————
WHAT'S INCLUDED WITH YOUR SUBSCRIPTION…
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.
Misleading advertising: raised by 6 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 83 reviews we read)
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
Reviewers repeatedly report that the app is not what its advertising showed. We never see the ad creative itself, so nothing we collect can corroborate or refute this — it is published as an attributed user report: what reviewers say, and how many of them said it.
Paywall blocks the basics: raised by 11 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 45 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.
The store privacy disclosure (6 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.
Misleading Ads — Will be filing a complaint with FTC.
False advertising — The app makes you go through a long and arduous process of answering questions, false hope, and intruding on your personal habits, to then promise to help you with them… only for $40.00 a year, they said nothing about…
scam — advertises as free but makes you read a bunch of information just to cost
Money — Everything in this world cost money. Yeah yeah I don’t need an app to improve myself but I was kinda excited for this one. Seemed fun.
Pay — Locked behind a paywall
Pay Wall Locked — Makes you go through a lengthy intro to set up a complete goals and schedule just to be blocked behind a paywall. No trail, you don’t get to access any of the futures until after you pay. I’d rather try something out…
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 6.6.3 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-27 .
The store currently lists version 6.6.3, updated 2026-10-25.
Each store’s release notes, as the developer wrote them. They are the developer’s words, not ours.
Fixed a crash that could close the app when opening Home. Sorry for the trouble, and thank you for your patience.
Thanks for using Life Reset (Formerly Rise), the #1 self-improvement app to get your life together chosen by 1,500,000+ people, with a range of tools and features designed to help you build better habits, stay productive, and transform your daily routine for a healthier, more focused life. What's new: - Press and hold a task to open its options again - Your daily progress now moves to the new day on time - Fixed an issue that could stop the app from opening - Bug fixes and performance improvements
Appworthy
life-resetAssessed 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.
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.