Serious warnings 2 confirmed warnings. Checked: 400 reviews, the Android app’s code, the store listing and the privacy label.
From our automated analysis, 30 Oct 2026. Every label links to its evidence in the full report below.
This analysis describes version 3.2.0 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-30 .
The store currently lists version 3.2.0, updated 2026-09-25.
Store screenshots supplied by the developer.
Welcome to this engaging and satisfying nuts and bolts color sort game! It is the ultimate puzzle game where fun meets relaxation! With mysterious nuts that keep you guessing, and surprise special levels that pop up when you least expect them, every round is packed with fun and excitement. Plus, with a variety of cool themes, there's always something new to explore.
It's not just about the challenge, it's about the chill. Enjoy unlimited shuffles, skip levels at your leisure, and take all the time you need. No rush, no pressure, just pure sorting bliss.
And when it comes to satisfaction, we've got you covered. With powerful bolt tools, a generous reward system, and over ten thousand levels, this game is guaranteed to keep you hooked. Whether you're a color-match newbie or a sort-it master, Nuts Sort is your ticket to endless sorting fun!…
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 16 distinct ad networks / mediation SDKs: Amazon Publisher Services, AppLovin MAX, BidMachine, Chartboost and 12 more
The package embeds several distinct advertising or mediation SDKs — a stack built for ad volume, not for a single house ad.
Package artefact
Appworthy
sha256:71e447cc5c3ed78299e158f5622cb6492b72bf36a7e5e3d648035b2b4f75024bAggressive ad load: raised by 25 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 16 reviews we read)
Advertising volume or placement that interrupts normal use: ads between every action, unskippable or forced full-screen ads.
Open observations that have not cleared the evidence bar.
The app's own text says: "Are you sure? You will lose your reward."
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
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.
Package artefact
sha256:71e447cc5c3ed78299e158f5622cb6492b72bf36a7e5e3d648035b2b4f75024bThe app's own text says: "Open ad when you're back online."
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
The app's own copy describes working without a connection — offline mode, downloading for offline use, or content saved for later. Shown because readers filter on it; it is a feature, not a fairness property, and never counts for or against an app.
Package artefact
sha256:71e447cc5c3ed78299e158f5622cb6492b72bf36a7e5e3d648035b2b4f75024b400 reviews read for this analysis. Each observation keeps the sample and store it was based on.
constant banner ads, lots of full page ads that if you are quick enough you shut the app dawn and restart of waste a lot of time watching ads. also the quicker you are shutting the app the less money the dev makes. did i mention there are…
Even if you pay to remove the ads they made levels that force you to watch an ad. When they could have easily made it so you could spend gold coins on extra bolts. Wish I could get my money back at this rate suuuuper disappointing.
nothing but adds. more adds than gameplay. it forces you to open other apps then you have to back out of them. deleting.
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 3.2.0, scanned 27 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 3.2.0 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-30 .
The store currently lists version 3.2.0, updated 2026-09-25.
Each store’s release notes, as the developer wrote them. They are the developer’s words, not ours.
Hey players! Explore the Question-Mark Screw Nut Mode and take on exciting new challenges! Plus, we've fixed bugs and improved performance. Enjoy and relax!
No release notes were provided for this version.
nut-sort-apple-6737799378Assessed 2026-10-30 from 400 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.
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 recurring plan the store lists is named as weekly, the term read from the purchase names, with a list cut off at the store’s 10-item maximum not assessed; 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.