Some warnings 1 confirmed warning, and users report 1 more thing. Checked: 669 reviews, the Android app’s code, 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 1.2.22 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-27 .
The store currently lists version 1.2.22, updated 2026-10-15.
This analysis describes version 1.2.22 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-22 .
The store currently lists version 1.2.22, updated 2026-10-15.
Store screenshots supplied by the developer.
NARUTO: Ninja Cards is the officially licensed NARUTO collectible cards app. Collect them to build your dream squad, master your chakra, and dive into real-time ninja strategy on mobile. Whether you’re a longtime fan or a curious new recruit, this is your chance to relive the story — and reshape it.
RTS activity: Deploy your cards across three dynamic lanes. Outsmart the others by timing your chakra and activating jutsus at the perfect moment. Every encounter lasts 3 minutes or less.
Never-before-seen official NARUTO Cards: Collect and upgrade exclusive new cards featuring Naruto, Sasuke, Sakura, and hundreds of legendary characters.
Ninja Team Work: Some combos are familiar. Others will surprise even the most seasoned ninja. Mix characters and jutsu to discover unstoppable team synergies.
Online Challenges: Test your deck against other shinobis around the world.…
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.
Bundles 4 distinct ad networks / mediation SDKs: Amazon Publisher Services, AppLovin MAX, Fyber / Digital Turbine Exchange, Mintegral
The package embeds several distinct advertising or mediation SDKs — a stack built for ad volume, not for a single house ad.
Package artefact
Appworthy
sha256:d64d9be56e69f7c56a99be113df7d13204327ae9c0e215b97be3b0feb5199486Specific 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.
Ships session-recording SDK (Smartlook) that can replay on-screen activity
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
The app ships session-recording or a wide tracking stack, holds permissions that read personal data, or is reported by users to sell, leak or over-collect it. The evidence line says which of those was observed.
Package artefact
sha256:d64d9be56e69f7c56a99be113df7d13204327ae9c0e215b97be3b0feb5199486Ships a purchase screen ("Paywall intent is not provided.") with no dismiss, skip or "continue free" text anywhere in the package
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
A paywall screen ships with no dismiss, skip or 'maybe later' affordance anywhere in the package, so the app's own text offers no way in without paying.
Package artefact
sha256:d64d9be56e69f7c56a99be113df7d13204327ae9c0e215b97be3b0feb5199486Sells a subscription in-app but ships no cancel or manage-subscription text of its own, leaving the store's settings as the only exit
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
Cancelling the subscription is blocked, hidden, multi-step, or simply does not take effect.
Package artefact
sha256:d64d9be56e69f7c56a99be113df7d13204327ae9c0e215b97be3b0feb5199486Pay to progress: raised by 18 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 25 reviews we read)
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
Advancement or competition is gated behind spending money rather than playing.
669 reviews read for this analysis. Each observation keeps the sample and store it was based on.
If the game was less P2W it would be more fun
Legendary cards are excessively rare, which creates an environment that heavily favors a pay-to-win model.
Not everything competitive — Needs offline play, I don’t want to play against sweats, just have fun getting cool cards. Oh I just found that toads are overpowered nice that makes sense, why am I playing people level 175 as a level 20…
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.
Android package 1.2.22, scanned 22 Oct 2026. These describe that package, not the current store version.
Supporting measurements: not a complete list of possible harms or positives. Measurement vocabulary 1.4 · how these are measured
This analysis describes version 1.2.22 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-27 .
The store currently lists version 1.2.22, updated 2026-10-15.
This analysis describes version 1.2.22 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-22 .
The store currently lists version 1.2.22, updated 2026-10-15.
Each store’s release notes, as the developer wrote them. They are the developer’s words, not ours.
- Major bug fixing on the Ranked Mode - New avatar and event items - Updated Clan feature user interface - Various bug fixes
No release notes were provided for this version.
No release notes were provided for this version.
naruto-apple-6745524419Assessed 2026-10-27 from 669 user reviews, the app's package, the store listing and its privacy label.
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. Six independent signals are read — user reviews, SDKs in the app package, the app's own on-screen text, the app manifest, 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.