Serious warnings 2 confirmed warnings. Checked: 448 reviews and the Android app’s code.
From our automated analysis, 30 Oct 2026. Every label links to its evidence in the full report below.
This analysis describes version 21.77.0 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-30 .
The store currently lists version 21.77.0, updated 2026-09-24.
Store screenshots supplied by the developer.
Try out this challenging free-to-play word puzzle game.
Enjoying challenging levels with the mixture of scapes design.
Improve your written and spelling skills while kicking back.
In this challenging crossword puzzle game, you will:
► Solve Word Puzzles!
Solve crossword puzzles; word find challenges; word swipe scrabbles quests and more challenges for your brain.
►Renovate and Design!
Fix, build, paint and design your rooms. Make it unique and make it your own!
Join our puzzle adventure and get ready to become a spelling master!
Game Highlights:
► Gameplay - Solve each level by completing a word puzzle - connecting the letters and spelling words that fit perfectly into the crossword puzzle blocks.…
From the developer’s store description.
For developers and the curious
The evidence, sources, measurements and versions behind every label above.
Findings that met the published evidence standard.
Bundles 16 distinct ad networks / mediation SDKs: Amazon Publisher Services, AppLovin MAX, BidMachine, Chartboost and 12 more
The package embeds several distinct advertising or mediation SDKs — a stack built for ad volume, not for a single house ad.
Package artefact
Appworthy
sha256:87baadef3fd17c7ae555f0ac8848e9925886711bf78493aeeb6d45d05f7f06caAggressive ad load: raised by 9 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 50 reviews we read)
Advertising volume or placement that interrupts normal use: ads between every action, unskippable or forced full-screen ads.
Specific evidence of a useful property, within the stated scope.
The 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.
Sells a subscription in-app but ships no cancel or manage-subscription text of its own, leaving the store's settings as the only exit
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
Cancelling the subscription is blocked, hidden, multi-step, or simply does not take effect.
Package artefact
sha256:87baadef3fd17c7ae555f0ac8848e9925886711bf78493aeeb6d45d05f7f06caPurchase screen steers the choice: "BEST VALUE"
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
The purchase screen arrives with one plan already framed as the recommended or most popular choice, so the default is the app's preference rather than the user's. We do not compare the plans' prices, and only the app's own text evidences this, so it is shown, but never counted as a charge.
Package artefact
sha256:87baadef3fd17c7ae555f0ac8848e9925886711bf78493aeeb6d45d05f7f06ca448 reviews read for this analysis. Each observation keeps the sample and store it was based on.
Ads after EVERY level, even if it takes 30 seconds to finish the level, they're long, have multiple layers, and they take you to the playstore. I don't want to hear that I can pay for no ads, NOBODY cares about watching ads for a free…
bombarded by adds within seconds
Cannot recommend. If you think outside the box and guess words not in their limited list, you don't get a bonus. Other word games do this so much better. Forced ads are annoying, but at least they don't interrupt your game, so that gets a…
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.
Android package 21.77.0, scanned 21 Oct 2026. These describe that package, not the current store version.
Supporting measurements: not a complete list of possible harms or positives. Measurement vocabulary 1.4 · how these are measured
This analysis describes version 21.77.0 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-30 .
The store currently lists version 21.77.0, updated 2026-09-24.
Each store’s release notes, as the developer wrote them. They are the developer’s words, not ours.
Bug fixes & game improvements, enjoy!
No release notes were provided for this version.
words-madnessAssessed 2026-10-30 from 448 user reviews and the app's package.
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. Four independent signals are read — user reviews, SDKs in the app package, the app's own on-screen text and the app manifest — 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 recurring plan the store lists is named as weekly, the term read from the purchase names, with a list cut off at the store’s 10-item maximum not assessed; 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.