DiscoverBrowse CategoriesHow it worksMethodologyFor developers
Dance AI - Video Generator
DeePix AI · Photo & Video

We analyzed this app across 3 independent signals and corroborated nothing unfair. That is a signal, not an audit.

Nothing unfair corroborated · unauditedConfidence: High3 signal sources1,685 reviews scannedNot human-reviewedas of 2026-10-06
 Which version this describes

This analysis describes version 1.1.0 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-06 . The app may have changed since.

The store currently lists version 1.1.0, updated 2026-09-11.

What the analysis found

Each finding shows what agreed and how strongly. Automated analysis

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.

Reported by users: Trial converts to a charge
One source onlyShown, not confirmed — the only source is user reviews.view evidence
The free trial demands a payment method up front and/or rolls into a paid subscription with no usable warning.
What we saw: Trial converts to a charge: raised by 7 distinct reviewers (0.4% of 1685 reviews scanned)
Reported by users: Reports that the ads misrepresent the app
One source onlyShown, not confirmed — the only source is user reviews.view evidence
Reviewers repeatedly report that the app is not what its advertising showed. We never see the ad creative itself, so nothing we collect can corroborate or refute this — it is published as an attributed user report: what reviewers say, and how many of them said it.
What we saw: Misleading advertising: raised by 6 distinct reviewers (0.4% of 1685 reviews scanned)

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.

Trial converts to a charge

Charging money for free trial — I've been charged money before free trial finished

1★ · App Store · 2026-10-01

Changed after free trial — Was charged after the second day I canceled on a free trial!!!!

1★ · App Store · 2026-09-29

Reports that the ads misrepresent the app

Terrible — Put my dog in the photo like it shows on tic tok and it put a black man in the video instead 🤦🏻‍♂️ the other dancer looks nothing like my son either - shocking ! And you have to pay monthly subscription with options to buy…

1★ · App Store · 2026-09-28

Complete scam — False advertisement, it does not generate anything as advertised, pictures get cuentes completely or you get the original template as the result. Very upsetting I will contact my bank to get my $7.99 back. Stay away from…

1★ · App Store · 2026-09-24

What this app sells

Every purchase the store discloses. Store listing
 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.

Subscriptions7
Weekly Premium Weekly$9.99
Weekly Standart Premium Weekly$9.99
Weekly Basic PremiumWeekly$11.99
Weekly Gold Premium Weekly$12.99
Quarter Coin PackEvery 3 months$14.99
Yearly Premium Yearly$79.99
Yearly Premium Yearly$39.99
One-off packs3
Half Coin PackPack$24.99
Full Coin PackPack$34.99
Starter PackPack$9.99
This list is cut off. Apple shows at most 10 in-app purchases, and this app is at the limit — so it very likely sells more than we can see.

How the automated analysis works

Automated, corroborated, and never human-reviewed without a person.

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.

 Not yet human-reviewed

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.

 How this page was produced
Analyzed 2026-10-06 Version analyzed: 1.1.03 independent signals1,685 reviews scannedConfidence: HighNot human-reviewedVocabulary v1.13Methodology v1.3
Signals run: user reviews, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure. Not yet checked: SDKs in the app package, the app's own on-screen text and the app manifest.