We analyzed this app across 3 independent signals and corroborated nothing unfair. That is a signal, not an audit.
This analysis describes version 13.36.1 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 13.36.1, updated 2026-09-29.
What the analysis found
One source only — shown, not confirmed 3
A single kind of evidence. We publish these because withholding them would be the bigger distortion, and we do not treat any of them as a finding we stand behind.
What reviewers said
Verbatim excerpts from public store reviews, shown as corroborating user reports. They are not Appworthy audit evidence, and a quotation is not proof of the finding it sits under.
Hard to cancel
Be careful they charge after you cancel. — BE VERY CAREFUL WITH THIS APP! SHADY DEVELOPERS! Very hard to cancel your subscription and even after I did through multiple emails I was still charged numerous times.
Don’t buy— almost impossible to cancel. By design. — I downloaded this to edit my videos from a suggestion of chat gpt. Don’t do it guys. I literally had so much trouble canceling my subscription that I went ahead and canceled my debit…
Greedy as heck — 20 bucks for just adding caption to the video??? No thank you. Then they lure you to subscribe through web with a slightly better price. DON’T fall for it. They make it super hard to cancel the subscription if you do it…
Paywall blocks the basics
It’s says Free Trial but is NOT — this app says Free Trial but when you try to download your project you can’t!, if I want to try it first it’s because I want to see if works for my work on social media, but you are unable to download the…
Paywall — Terrible Edits and Lyric/Vocal to caption generation. Then after 20-30 mins and you’ve worked out a clip you believe is useable, it’s locked behind a 30$ paywall to export the video. Greedy As Hell and I could’ve just stuck with…
horrible app — I have used this app for seven months and once they added that AI twin feature, the app just started turning horrible the whole reason I downloaded this app was to AI edit my videos and that was basically the apps whole job…
Reports of unexpected charges
Scam — they took my money. Then my credits expired without notice. They also charge credits for edits that are their fault!
App doesn’t work and customer service is terrible — Not user friendly, all their AI edits does is increasing the speed of video and adding captions in different fonts in a way it doesn’t make sense and covers important pictures and…
Be careful — Based on my experience, do not create an account. Once you sign up, it’s almost impossible to delete it. They keep charging you every week or every month, and even though there’s a delete option, it doesn’t actually let you…
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.
Several measurements above say “Not assessed” because no artefact we hold can answer them. A human review is what resolves those — and it can remove a favourable band as easily as add one.
Hands-on inspections are not yet open.