No warnings found Nothing found in 500 reviews, the store listing and the privacy label. We check costs, ads, pressure and tracking, not everything.
From our automated analysis, 27 Oct 2026.
This analysis describes version 4.1.14 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-27 .
The store currently lists version 4.1.14, updated 2026-10-22.
** Editor's Choice ** — Apple
** App of the Day ** — Apple
** Approved for privacy, security, clinical assurance, and safety ** — DHAF & ORCHA
Rootd is anxiety and panic attack relief in your pocket. Award-winning, scientifically validated, female led and seen in Women's Health, Time Magazine, Healthline and more. With millions of users worldwide, Rootd is the go-to app for anxiety & panic attacks for more and more people each day.
“I’ve suffered from panic attacks for almost 10 years. I’ve done CBT, medication, meditation, but nothing helped me in the moment when that panic attack hit, until I downloaded Rootd. Rootd makes it feel like someone is with me, even when I’m alone. I owe my continued stability to this simple genius app. It's a MUST for all who are facing the same type of war.” RainyNally…
From the developer’s store description.
For developers and the curious
The evidence, sources, measurements and versions behind every label above.
Facts that add context without being a charge.
In-app purchases run from USD 2.99 to USD 179.99 — a 60x spread across 10 items
The disclosed in-app purchases span an unusually wide price range. Published as context: the cheapest and priciest items may be different kinds of product entirely, so the spread alone deducts nothing.
Nothing was published as a thing to watch for in this assessment. That is not a finding that nothing is wrong with the app.
No review-based observation is published in this assessment. That does not establish that reviewers had no problems.
“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 4.1.14 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-27 .
The store currently lists version 4.1.14, updated 2026-10-22.
Each store’s release notes, as the developer wrote them. They are the developer’s words, not ours.
October is Mental Health Awareness Month, a time when many of us pause to notice how we’ve been feeling and what we need. Rootd is here for that: open our visualizations to check in with yourself, settle an anxious mind, and take care of your mental health this month. We’re continuing to grow a library of enriching visualizations, each carefully crafted to help you reset your nervous system when life feels loud.
Appworthy
rootdAssessed 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.