We analyzed this app across 3 independent signals and corroborated nothing unfair. That is a signal, not an audit.
This analysis describes version 6.1.1 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 6.1.1, updated 2026-09-02.
What the analysis found
One source only — shown, not confirmed 4
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.
Reports of unexpected charges
BEWARE! Thieves. — I’ve cancelled this stupid subscription after one time of use and I still, 3 months later am being charged! After I cancelled online- still got charged. I’ve been in touch with customer service where they’ve cancelled…
Cancelled - still charged — I joined with a one dollar trial and canceled right away. The cancellation instructions are unclear even though I was told that I canceled and now I just got charged $20 for a renewal that I didn’t want it…
Cancellation Scam — Worst customer service. I received an email confirming they received my cancellation request. They continued to charge me not only every two weeks but every week which wasn’t the agreement of the original subscription…
Trial converts to a charge
Fake — I got this app on the website before downloading it on the App Store. They said there would be $4 charge for the 3 day free trial then I can cancel anytime I wanted to try the app so I bought the 3 day trial but apparently I got…
THIS APP WILL ROB YOU — I signed up for the free trial which was misleading on when they will charge you again . I was charged 29.99 after really being charged 19.99 and I had canceled the app after the first charge and then I reported it…
honest opinion — *understand you are going to get charged with the free trial I clicked on this ad through the “astrocartography chart reading” they had advertised on social media. they included false advertising by saying that I would…
Hard to cancel
Subscription — It’s will automatically charge you subscription renewal. It’s impossible to unsubscribe. $19.99 repeatedly charging.
AI responses, that take too long — This app sucks. Just ask chat gpt what you should do, that’s all this is. The “tarot reader” only is available for 3 minutes then you have to pay for additional minutes, and they make u wait for way too…
Not recommended — App intentionally makes it hard to cancel subscription
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 1 more purchase 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.