Some warnings 14 users report an aggressive ad load. Nothing confirmed. Checked: 500 reviews, the store listing and the privacy label.
From our automated analysis, 24 Oct 2026. Every label links to its evidence in the full report below.
This analysis describes version 3.8.7 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-24 .
The store currently lists version 3.8.7, updated 2026-08-29.
Store screenshots supplied by the developer.
Get Paid for Walking – It’s That Simple!
Turn your everyday steps into real rewards! Walk as you normally do and open the app to track how many steps you’ve taken and how much money you’ve earned. No matter where you walk – indoors or outdoors – we pay you for every step. Feeling tired but still want to keep earning? Use our daily bonuses to stay on track!
Why Walk with Us?
Motivate yourself to walk more while earning money along the way. Yes, we literally pay you to walk! If you’re looking for a fun and rewarding way to stay active, this app is your perfect companion.
How Does It Work?
1) Complete the One Million Steps Challenge.
2) That’s it! Redeem your money and enjoy the rewards!
No complicated steps, just walk and earn.
Disclaimer:
The money and gift cards paid out in this app are in no way affiliated with Apple.…
From the developer’s store description.
For developers and the curious
The evidence, sources, measurements and versions behind every label above.
Open observations that have not cleared the evidence bar.
Aggressive ad load: raised by 14 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 36 reviews we read)
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
Advertising volume or placement that interrupts normal use: ads between every action, unskippable or forced full-screen ads.
Nothing was published as a thing to watch for in this assessment. That is not a finding that nothing is wrong with the app.
500 reviews read for this analysis. Each observation keeps the sample and store it was based on.
New limits suck! — 5000 daily step limit and an ad for every 500 steps? That’s stupid and a great way to lose users. If I weren’t 3/4 of the way to my 1 million steps required to cash out, I’d delete.
Scam — Do not download this app! I got the one million steps and I never got my reward what a huge waste of time I watched so many ads for this dumb app scammers I contacted support and they don’t answer either
Once you get past 7K it’s a scam — I’ve had this app for about a year now i’ve been logging in every day to get my 5000 steps since it makes me watch ads to get more. Then I reached 7K steps and now it makes me watch an ad just to collect…
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.
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 3.8.7 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-24 .
The store currently lists version 3.8.7, updated 2026-08-29.
Each store’s release notes, as the developer wrote them. They are the developer’s words, not ours.
Bug fixes and performance improvements.
Appworthy
stepsAssessed 2026-10-24 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.
No itemized purchase list is available for this listing.
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.