DiscoverBrowse CategoriesHow it worksMethodologyFor developers
Ingress
Niantic Spatial Inc · Lifestyle

Analyzed automatically. Assessed 2026-10-04 from 427 user reviews, the app's package, the store listing and its privacy label.

Analyzed automaticallyConfidence: High6 signal sources427 reviews scannedNot human-reviewedas of 2026-10-04
 Which version this describes

We cannot tell which version of the app this analysis describes. It was run 2026-10-04 , and the app may have changed since.

The store currently lists version 3.15.1, updated 2026-09-22.

What the analysis found

Each finding shows what agreed and how strongly. Automated analysis

Context 1

Measured and published because a reader would want to know — deliberately not a charge. The measurement alone does not show a harm.

Asks for more sensitive permissions than similar apps
MeasuredPublished as context — deliberately not a charge · from the app manifestartefact fe91c89f5c98…
The package requests substantially more of the device's sensitive permissions than the typical app in its category. This is a measurement, not an accusation: a permission is granted because a feature needs it, and a wide request list is a reason to look rather than a finding on its own.
What we saw: Requests 8 sensitive permissions (ACCESS_BACKGROUND_LOCATION, ACCESS_COARSE_LOCATION, ACCESS_FINE_LOCATION, ACTIVITY_RECOGNITION, CAMERA, READ_CONTACTS, READ_EXTERNAL_STORAGE, RECORD_AUDIO); the median for 55 scanned apps in Adventure is 0

Positive evidence 2

Things this app does right, published at the same strengths as the catch list.

No advertising SDKs
Measuredfrom SDKs in the app packageartefact fe91c89f5c98…
No advertising or mediation SDK of any kind was found in the package.
What we saw: No advertising or mediation SDK among the 6 SDKs detected in the package
Developer says data deletion can be requested
Measuredfrom the store listingview evidence
The developer's data-safety disclosure on the store states that users can request deletion of their data, or the app's own text offers a way to delete the account. This restates what the developer declares; it is not a test of whether deletion works. Apple publishes no equivalent disclosure, so on an Apple-only listing only the app's own text can support it.
What we saw: The developer's store data-safety disclosure states that data deletion can be requested; we have not seen a deletion control in the app's own text

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: Pay to progress
One source onlyShown, not confirmed — the only source is user reviews.view evidence
Advancement or competition is gated behind spending money rather than playing.
What we saw: Pay to progress: raised by 9 distinct reviewers (2.1% of 427 reviews scanned)
In the app's own text: Hard to cancel
One source onlyShown, not confirmed — the only source is the app's own on-screen text.artefact fe91c89f5c98…
Cancelling the subscription is blocked, hidden, multi-step, or simply does not take effect.
What we saw: Sells a subscription in-app but ships no cancel or manage-subscription text of its own, leaving the store's settings as the only exit

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.

Pay to progress

I love the Game but its is Pay to Win. Nothing is done about cheaters with duplicate accounts. And it is not possible anymore to report them. And now have made it not easy to report.

1★ · Google Play · 2025-10-27

Used to be pretty amazing back in the day, now they push p2w in your face and don't really do much about multi-acc backpackers, esp if they've got a subscription going, from what I've seen, they just get warned, but no actual punishments…

3★ · Google Play · 2026-05-11

Garbage interface. Constant overlay in the way. Not anything like the original ingress that I was one of the original players and supporters. Edit: Now they started with pop-ups for trying to sell pay to win stuff. no thanks.

1★ · Google Play · 2026-01-16

What this app sells

Every purchase the store discloses. Store listing
 What this app sells
Google Play doesn’t publish per-purchase prices, so this list covers the other store only.

How the automated analysis works

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

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.

 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 2026-10-04 Version analyzed: unknown6 independent signals427 reviews scannedConfidence: HighNot human-reviewedVocabulary v1.13Methodology v1.3
Signals run: 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.