Nothing published. That is not a guarantee the app is problem-free.
No specific positive published.
From our automated analysis, 13 Oct 2026. Every label links to its evidence in the full report below.
This analysis describes version 2.19.0 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-13 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 2.19.0, updated 2026-09-01.
Store screenshots supplied by the developer.
More fun than Words With Friends and more addicting than Scrabble, WORD CHUMS: the highest rated word game, earning a perfect 5 Star rating from users.
Find out why people are saying “Once you play it, you can’t go back to your old word game.”
“When I went from Words With Friends and other word games to Word Chums, there was no going back.” - VentureBeat
“This game takes it to another level with fun graphics and sounds, a built in dictionary, team mode, 3-4 player mode…”
◆◆◆◆◆
"I really love this game. A great game for the whole family and your friends.. It keeps you thinking. It's a challenge. Try it, you'll love it."
◆◆◆◆◆
"Way better than other word games! I am hooked!"
“Word Chums adds a significant layer of additional incentives to keep playing atop the basic formula.” Adweek
◆ INTRODUCING THE CHUMS
Oozing with personality, they bring the game to life.…
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 0.99 to USD 49.99 — a 50x 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.
Open observations that have not cleared the evidence bar.
Aggressive ad load: raised by 25 distinct reviewers (4.4% of 568 reviews scanned)
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.
568 reviews read for this analysis. Each observation keeps the sample and store it was based on.
Chums — This is the best game ever. Thank you! And I mean it!! I still love Chums! Still the best game ever! Thank you for it! Still loving it. Hope you never take it away! I’m still thinking it’s just the best! Thank you very much! Still…
🤬POP UP ADS🤬 — I enjoy this game but have been so annoyed as of late with ADS popping up in the middle of me just looking 👀 @the board. Makes me say “enough for now” & stop playing. It’s very frustrating 🤬
It’s fun but... — there’s a lot of ads
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.
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.
Measurement vocabulary 1.4 · how these are measured
This analysis describes version 2.19.0 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-13 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 2.19.0, updated 2026-09-01.
Each store’s release notes, as the developer wrote them. They are the developer’s words, not ours.
- Performance Improvements
Appworthy
word-chums-apple-517840944Assessed 2026-10-13 from 568 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.