We analyzed this app across 3 independent signals and corroborated nothing unfair. That is a signal, not an audit.
This analysis describes version 7.3.2 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 7.3.2, updated 2026-09-28.
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.
Aggressive ad load
Candy jar — Great stories but you can't watch ads and you have no way to freely get coins. It's a money grab and the app is lying saying you can use ads
$20 a WEEK — I waited the 14 hours to watch the next episode and it won't let me- but it will still let me pay $20 a week or buy the episodes (and when the episodes are a minute who can really justify that). Also somehow more expensive…
It could be better but it’s good — It’s good and everything but you only get to watch so many episodes in different shows but after so many you have to wait 24 hours to watch more on that show and you can’t watch ads for points but if…
Hard to cancel
Horrible customer service — No one responds to emails and you cannot cancel. I am being charged $10.99 a week against my will.
App won’t load — I can’t cancel my subscription
What is going on? — I think the app is great. I enjoyed a couple of dramas on here, but I can’t cancel my subscription and it keeps trying to take my money every time I try to click managed subscription. It says that something is going on…
Users describe the free version as usable
Only one thing I would change — Candy jar is amazing i love how you don’t have to pay for the episodes if someone asked me what I would change about candy jar I would say only one thing which is how you have to wait for the episodes to be…
hot stories — really good app, love the stories and the yearly option is actually a really good deal, wish you didnt have to pay butntoher then that great
👍 — I just wish you didn’t have to pay for more episodes
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.