Appworthy

Splits Training, Do the Splits

30 Day Splits Challenge

Leap Health
Download on theApp Store
App Store rating4.8★3.7K ratings
PriceFreeIn-app $5.99–$19.99
Age12+Store age rating
Size96 MBiPhone download
CategoryHealth & Fitness
DeveloperLeap Health

What we found

Full report

Too little checked to say Only 342 reviews read, too few to say.

Money

From our automated analysis, 27 Oct 2026.

This analysis describes version 1.0.16 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-27 .

The store currently lists version 1.0.16, updated 2025-09-08.

Preview

Screenshot 1Screenshot 2Screenshot 3Screenshot 4Screenshot 5

Store screenshots supplied by the developer.

About this app

Splits Training is designed for all levels to get full splits step by step, even if you are a beginner. The mixing of static and dynamic splits helps you improve flexibility effectively and achieve results faster than you think. With just 10 min a day, you’ll get closer and closer to the floor!

Productive stretches for splits in 30 days are suitable for men and women, adults and kids. You can customize your splits training based on your own preferences, no equipment needed.

Whether you want to do a full split for dance, ballet, gymnastics or martial arts, this training will help you get there.

Why splits?

Splits have been proven to prevent injuries, increase muscle strength, relieve muscle stiffness and give you better circulation.

Improve your flexibility & balance

Flexibility and balance are key to reducing the risk of injury during exercise.…

From the developer’s store description.

For developers and the curious

The full report

The evidence, sources, measurements and versions behind every label above.

Findings and evidence

0 published · 1 shown, not confirmed

One source only — shown, not confirmed 1

Open observations that have not cleared the evidence bar.

Users describe the free version as usable

One source only

Reviewers describe the free version as usable: raised by 6 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 57 reviews we read)

Sources
User reviews
Agreement
Only one kind of source so far. Shown, not counted.
Where measured
From App Store reviews

This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.

Definition

Reviewers repeatedly say the free version is worth using on its own. Nothing we can measure corroborates that — a free listing with in-app purchases looks identical whether the free tier is generous or a demo — so this is published as what reviewers say, not as a measured credit.

Open evidence
How we know
Share and sample
1.8% of the 342 reviews read.

Nothing was published as a thing to watch for in this assessment. That is not a finding that nothing is wrong with the app.

What reviewers report

342 reviews read · 1 review-based observation

342 reviews read for this analysis. Each observation keeps the sample and store it was based on.

Users describe the free version as usable

Shown, not confirmed

Love it!! — This app is so good !! It tracks the our steps, reminds me to drink water!! But I really. Would love if you didn’t have to pay for no ads ,more music options , and more stretches and exercises but besides that this is a good…

4★ · App Store · 2025-11-26

About spilts — I love this app I got flexible and it help me and tell you what to do and why that exercise is it loved it and you don’t need to pay

5★ · App Store · 2024-01-15

Great app!! — This is such a amazing app and I’m a cheerleader so this is really helpful knowing I don’t have to pay or anything 😁

5★ · App Store · 2022-02-04

A sampled review illustrates one person’s experience. It does not establish a finding on its own.

Measurements

5 measured · 3 not assessed

“Not assessed” means we could not measure it. It is never a zero and never a pass.

From store data and reviews

Developer replies to reviews
Replies to fewer than 1 review in 20
Price in the store description
The store description lists a price and how often it bills
Cancelling, in the store description
The store description doesn’t say how to cancel (most don’t)
Themes reported by reviewers
No theme reported
Counted from the reviews we have read for this app. "No theme reported" means no theme reached our reporting threshold — it is not a finding that nothing is wrong with this app, and we do not say it is.
Five-star share of ratings
90% or more five-star
Arithmetic on the stores' own published rating counts. It says nothing about why the ratings fall where they do.

In the app package we scanned

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.

Sensitive permissions
Not assessed
No package has been scanned for this app
Analytics or tracking SDKs in the scanned package
Not assessed
No package has been scanned for this app
Advertising SDKs in the scanned package
Not assessed
No package has been scanned for this app
How we know

Supporting measurements: not a complete list of possible harms or positives. Measurement vocabulary 1.4 · how these are measured

Versions and dates analysed

Assessed 27 Oct 2026

This analysis describes version 1.0.16 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-27 .

The store currently lists version 1.0.16, updated 2025-09-08.

Store update history

Each store’s release notes, as the developer wrote them. They are the developer’s words, not ours.

App Store

Version 1.0.16 · 2025-09-08
• Bug fixed

Assessment record

Status
Automated analysis
App identifier
splits-training-do-the-splits
Assessment date
27 Oct 2026
Sources used
3 independent signals: user reviews, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure
Reviews read
342
Package examined
No package scan
Human inspection
Not completed

Assessed 2026-10-27 from 342 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.

How we know
Measurement vocabulary
1.4

How this page was produced

Analyzed 2026-10-27 Version analyzed: 1.0.163 independent signals342 reviews scannedConfidence: HighNot human-reviewedVocabulary v1.13Methodology v1.3
Signals run: user reviews, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure. Not yet checked: SDKs in the app package, the app's own on-screen text and the app manifest.

Store facts

App Store

What the stores publish. Store ratings are the stores’ numbers, not Appworthy’s, and are never averaged across stores.

App Store

Store rating
4.79 ★ · 3,712 ratings
Version
1.0.16
Updated
8 Sep 2025
Price
Free · In-app purchases
Age rating
12+
Size
96 MB
Open in App Store
Developer
Leap Health
Category
Health & Fitness
Listing price
Free · In-app purchases

Purchases the store lists

 What this app sells

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.

Subscriptions1
Yearly subscriptionYearly$19.99
Ad removal1
Remove AdsTerm not stated$5.99

Method and limits

What this report can and cannot show

How the automated analysis works

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.

Limits of this report

  • A package scan is static. It identifies code and text in one Android build. It does not measure a live ad session, test a deletion request, or count the steps needed to cancel.
  • Reviews keep their sample. A review-only charge shows distinct reviewers, the share and the sample size, and is published only once it clears that label’s published threshold. Calibration labels are machine-drafted and not yet confirmed by a person.
  • Not assessed is a state. It is never a zero and never a pass.
  • A missing label is not a clean bill of health. It means the evidence did not support one, not that the app is problem-free.
Not yet human-reviewed. A hands-on test can confirm or contradict a finding and adds its own measurements; it does not change a measurement row. Hands-on inspections are not yet open.
Review thresholds Read the methodology For developers

Request a correction

[email protected]

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.

Report a factual error — free Email a correction