Nothing published. That is not a guarantee the app is problem-free.
From our automated analysis, 9 Oct 2026. Every label links to its evidence in the full report below.
This analysis describes version 1.4.55 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-09 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 1.4.55, updated 2026-09-15.
Store screenshots supplied by the developer.
New SSR Hunter Diana Lopez joins the battlefield!
The Battle Tier, Armory Slot, and the Core Max Level have been expanded,
along with the new Workshop of Brilliant Light dungeon and difficulty!
Experience an even tougher battlefield now.
Hunters, arise!
Get a Legendary Artifact Set + Sung Jinwoo's Black Suit costume just by playing the game! The adaptation of the webtoon with 14.3 billion views is playable NOW! Play Solo Leveling:ARISE!
[The action-packed webtoon comes to life with amazing graphics!]
Play as Jinwoo and experience every moment of his climb from the Weakest Hunter of All Mankind to the world’s strongest hunter!
Experience the webtoon’s story - and discover brand new exclusive stories!
[Play strategically with swappable equipment and skills!]
Watch your combat style evolve based on your choices!…
From the developer’s store description.
For developers and the curious
The evidence, sources, measurements and versions behind every label above.
Specific evidence of a useful property, within the stated scope.
No advertising or mediation SDK among the 4 SDKs detected in the package
No advertising or mediation SDK of any kind was found in the package.
Package artefact
Appworthy
sha256:4567a98312a7432ae6a1be12ef11b4ad6c1931eba0fd42e304f6b7b92e6c979dThe 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.
Pay to progress: raised by 18 distinct reviewers (2.6% of 692 reviews scanned)
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
Advancement or competition is gated behind spending money rather than playing.
Nothing was published as a thing to watch for in this assessment. That is not a finding that nothing is wrong with the app.
692 reviews read for this analysis. Each observation keeps the sample and store it was based on.
Full Pay to win game if anyones wondering. Been playing for 500 days and now its hardcore P2P. Also game crashes after winning a match in INTERNATION CLASH EVENT (where i need to get 7 points bt got 1 point instead and loss my victory…
The game is only made for P2W players F2P players please stay away.
It was good until the last update, the devs became very greedy...no summons tickets through events, they removed the free character weapon system....elements change every week....and the worst part is the because total tp and cp based…
A sampled review illustrates one person’s experience. It does not establish a finding on its own.
Supporting measurements. They are not a complete list of possible harms or positives. “Not assessed” means we could not measure it — never zero, never a pass.
Android package 1.4.55, scanned 28 Sep 2026. These describe that package, not the current store version.
Measurement vocabulary 1.4 · how these are measured
This analysis describes version 1.4.55 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-09 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 1.4.55, updated 2026-09-15.
Each store’s release notes, as the developer wrote them. They are the developer’s words, not ours.
No release notes were provided for this version.
solo-leveling-google-com-netmarble-sololvAssessed 2026-10-09 from 692 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.
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.