What’s the catch? Hard to cancel — reported by 29 users.
Analyzed automatically from 6 independent signals that had to agree — not a hands-on test, and not human-reviewed.
App Store
This analysis describes version 26.9.24 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 26.9.24, updated 2026-09-25.
Google Play
This analysis describes version 11.15.2 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 26.925.6138, updated 2026-10-01.
What the analysis found
The catch list 1
Charges we publish at a strength we stand behind: measured from an artefact, agreed by independent sources, or reported by enough users to clear that charge's own published bar.
Positive evidence 2
Things this app does right, published at the same strengths as the catch list.
One source only — shown, not confirmed 7
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
Very difficult to cancel. I'm on week two of trying to cancel and have been emailing their customer service in Singapore. All I get is the run around. Rather than helping, they keep pushing it back on me. Terrible app. Terrible customer…
AVOID! Edit: Their reply that they will 'sort this out' is also untrue. They still won't refund despite proof I visited the final cancelation page. They make it very difficult to cancel your subscription and even when you do, they will…
Do not use this app. It is impossible to cancel your subscription and when you do, it continues to charge you. There is no easy way to talk to someone at the company. Edit: It says a lot about a company that responds to a poor review…
Reports of unexpected charges
I cancelled EWA more than 6 months ago, but charges continued on my Visa card. No subscription appeared in the app or Google Play, and logging in with the same email showed a new-user onboarding flow. I was charged multiple times…
AVOID! Edit: Their reply that they will 'sort this out' is also untrue. They still won't refund despite proof I visited the final cancelation page. They make it very difficult to cancel your subscription and even when you do, they will…
We use this app for my daughter.... Unfortunately, the billing and customer support are very disappointing. I had already paid for a one-year subscription until June 2027 and cancelled the renewal, but I was charged again. I never…
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.
How the automated analysis works
This assessment is produced automatically. Six independent signals are read — user reviews, SDKs in the app package, the app's own on-screen text, the app manifest, 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.