We analyzed this app across 3 independent signals and corroborated nothing unfair. That is a signal, not an audit.
This analysis describes version 4.120.0 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-06 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 4.120.0, updated 2026-10-01.
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.
Aggressive ad load
Just no — I’ll rate this a 5 star once you get ads back I can’t pay every single penny of mine JUST for anime. Otherwise, 1 star is staying. 🙄
Paywall blocks the basics
Why — Anything even remotely new is locked behind premium even when they don’t show as being premium. At this point why even claim free.
EVERYTHING IS PREMIUM? — So I just downloaded this app and I'm MAD because every single anime I'm looking at right now is PREMIUM?? SO I CAN'T WATCH ONE ANIME AT ALL IN THIS APP??? can you PLEASE FIX THIS because this pisses me off
Everything is subscription. — I realized I hadn’t watched anime since 2023. I sat down and signed into my account to find to find that everything is now behind a paywall. I never was an avid crunchyroll user, I’ve always found the format…
Price keeps rising
Prices — The Price always be going up it’s annoying
Charging more while removing features — it’s like after every price hike they continue removing features that made me a fan of the app, if this keeps up I wouldnt be suprised to see more people setting sail ⛵️
expensive monopoly — thanks for increasing your subscription prices once again
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.