We analyzed this app across 3 independent signals and corroborated nothing unfair. That is a signal, not an audit.
This analysis describes version 6.9.20 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 6.9.20, updated 2026-08-18.
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
Signed up for free trial and was immediately charged $97 — I signed up for the free trial using a card with no funds in case this was a shady app. Sure enough, the tried to charge the card.Now, as soon as I register a new card they will…
DONT TRY THE FREE TRIAL — I set to try the free trial and it immediately charged me the 89.99. I went to where it says "manage subscription" in app and conveniently the button does not work, along with any kind of contact button. This is…
Charged for a free trial — Downloaded the app for a 3 day free trial and was immediately charged $97.
Paywall blocks the basics
Outrageous subscription costs — Every app nowadays has their content locked behind a paywall. 90$ per year is a scam and a ripoff. Just a greedy owner who over charges for a simple app.
Why so expensive?! — I had this app when it was free, now I can’t even click anything without asking to pay for it and since there is no free version I’ll be deleting it. It wasn’t great when it was free either so I’d never pay.
Pay wall — Use to have a free version with ads. Now stuck behind a paywall
Upgrade prompts use guilt-trip wording
Unusable — It feels a bit unfair to straight up give a one star review as I didn’t get to use it, but you cannot get past the prompt to pay for a subscription. I waited for several moments for an ‘x’ to pop up, but nothing. I was really…
App is flawed… STOP asking me to sign up!! — I already purchased this app and I paid for the year!! Yet EVERY time I try to use it, it asks me to subscribe and pay!? This has done this since I first purchased it. So annoying. FIX YOUR…
Look at the review section. Don’t buy it!!! It’s bug city!!! — Every time I press something it asks me to subscribe even tho I paid the $80 dollars for the yearly price.
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.