We analyzed this app across 3 independent signals and corroborated nothing unfair. That is a signal, not an audit.
This analysis describes version 6.44.0 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 6.44.0, updated 2026-08-29.
What the analysis found
One source only — shown, not confirmed 2
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
This organization is bad — Please do not download I’m begging you! I give this app a 0 stars. It doesn’t help with anything, give incorrect answered and it’s 100 times hard to cancel your subscription. Don’t waste your money!!!!! Trust…
This is a Scam App — Don’t make an account on this app or buy a subscription, they make it purposefully difficult to cancel the subscription and delete your account. Don’t get this app
Canceling membership is not an option! — App is impossible to cancel. I have canceled 3 times now and they keep charging me! I have clicked the cancel button but NOTHING HAPPENS! I’ve been waiting on the phone for over 25 mins waiting to…
Reports of unexpected charges
Scam chegg — It’s a scam. They don’t have any of the answers I asked took my money didn’t help once I try asking their expert but they don’t ever get back to you. Never they gotten back to me. Is stupid how you pay for it and is still…
Charged for over 3 months — No receipts just continued charges without my knowledge
SCAM — DO NOT PURCHASE. THEY WILL CONTINUE TO CHARGE YOU EVEN AFTER YOU CANCEL YOUR ACCOUNT.
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.
Show 2 more purchases we couldn’t categorise
These are really on sale; we just can’t tell from the name whether they recur.
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.