We analyzed this app across 3 independent signals and corroborated nothing unfair. That is a signal, not an audit.
This analysis describes version 3.9 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 3.9, updated 2026-09-25.
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.
Trial converts to a charge
I can’t cancel the subscription — I can’t cancel the subscription nor contact to the customer service!!!! This app is a total scam. One touch even charges $40even if I only wanted a free trial, they charged insane money on “personal…
Scam!!!! — They advertise for a deal and free trial and immediately charge you that same purchase instead of the free trial. I immediately cancelled on my apple settings. DO NOT GET THIS APP
Scam and unhelpful — Was shown a 7 day free trial but was charged INSTANTLY, sent an email and hoping for a refund. Also my suggested daily meal plan had anywhere from only 300-500 kcal per day when my target goal is over 3400 kcal.
Hard to cancel
Hard to cancel subscription — I signed up for a subscription on August 14 2026. This included a one week free trial. On August 20, following instructions, I sent an email requesting that my subscription be cancelled. It is now Aug 30 and…
Unable to cancel and support does not respond — Be very careful before subscribing to this app. I have been trying to cancel my subscription, but the “Manage Subscription” page in the app does not work, it just shows a completely blank…
I can’t cancel the subscription — I can’t cancel the subscription nor contact to the customer service!!!! This app is a total scam. One touch even charges $40even if I only wanted a free trial, they charged insane money on “personal…
Reports that the ads misrepresent the app
False advertising — After completing all of the intake info-it made a meal plan with everything I told it not to- selected vegan and gluten free- meals included meat and bread. False advertising and no response from customer support.
False advertising — This app is horrible. None of the features work as advertised. The recipes do not look appetizing and are all expensive to make. No one will be saving money on this app. The grocery list feature is extremely glitchy…
False advertisement — Any of the recipes I have seen on their advertisements I have not found.
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.