We analyzed this app across 3 independent signals and corroborated nothing unfair. That is a signal, not an audit.
This analysis describes version v8.8 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version v8.8, updated 2026-09-17.
What the analysis found
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.
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
Do not attend to use — Since January I been talking with Customer Service to cancel the plan, they keep taking my money for a service I never use! I regret deeply downloading this App!
WORST MOBILE NETWORK — I have had the WORST experience with Google Fi by far than any other plan. This is possibly the WORST company you can sign up with. They charged me $10/GB without my knowledge, when I thought I am signing up for the…
Roaming rarely works — I had GoogleFi for years as a backup 2nd carrier. After my 4th international trip where the roaming didn’t work, I’m switched and canceled. They kept charging me, Terrible intermittent issues so I could never rely…
Reports that the ads misrepresent the app
Okay service — This service is okay! However I did want to Mention that there is No such thing as Unlimited Like they claim they have, ones you reach a certain amount oF data. Then they end up charging you a Hell oF a lot extra. And Next…
Unreliable service — I have the unlimited plus service and it has been disappointing. I’ve been to Spain, Dubai and Saudi Arabia and I have not been able to have service, I am purchasing ESIM cards due to Google Fi’s incompetence I’ve…
False advertisement — Get you to sign up with promotion unlimited talk text and data. Then proceeds to prompt you for additional charges per gigabyte after 35 GB of data when original promotion was unlimited.
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.