DiscoverBrowse CategoriesHow it worksMethodologyFor developers
JustFit - Lazy Workout
ENERJOY PTE. LTD. · Health & Fitness

We analyzed this app across 6 independent signals and corroborated nothing unfair. That is a signal, not an audit.

Nothing unfair corroborated · unauditedConfidence: High6 signal sources469 reviews scannedNot human-reviewedas of 2026-10-04
 Which version this describes

This analysis describes version 1.8.4 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 1.8.4, updated 2026-09-16.

What the analysis found

Each finding shows what agreed and how strongly. Automated analysis

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 4d1b14d49de1…
No advertising or mediation SDK of any kind was found in the package.
What we saw: No advertising or mediation SDK among the 5 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 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.

In the app's own text: Trial terms not stated in the app's own text
One source onlyShown, not confirmed — the only source is the app's own on-screen text.artefact 4d1b14d49de1…
The app's own screens offer a free trial without stating, beside it, what happens when the trial ends. Read this as context rather than as a charge: renewal terms are normally shown on the store's purchase sheet instead, which we cannot see, and we can only observe one kind of evidence for this — so it is shown, but never counted as a charge.
What we saw: Offers a free trial ("Start 7-day free trial!") with no renewal price, renewal date or auto-renew notice anywhere in the app's own text
Reported by users: Hard to cancel
One source onlyShown, not confirmed — the only source is user reviews.view evidence
Cancelling the subscription is blocked, hidden, multi-step, or simply does not take effect.
What we saw: Hard to cancel: raised by 15 distinct reviewers (3.2% of 469 reviews scanned)
Reported by users: Reports that the ads misrepresent the app
One source onlyShown, not confirmed — the only source is user reviews.view evidence
Reviewers repeatedly report that the app is not what its advertising showed. We never see the ad creative itself, so nothing we collect can corroborate or refute this — it is published as an attributed user report: what reviewers say, and how many of them said it.
What we saw: Misleading advertising: raised by 11 distinct reviewers (2.3% of 469 reviews scanned)

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

Beware it is almost impossible to find a way to cancel this subscription. £38.95 taken from my account despite believing I had cancelled. And now no way to see to cancel it. I have followed instructions from the app & web pages, but the…

1★ · Google Play · 2026-06-08

The movements are just not intuitive that you need to keep holding on to your phone while doing the movements, hence not fully focused. be careful with the subscription, it is super super hard to unsubscribe, almost cannot find the…

2★ · Google Play · 2026-05-21

Beware! Nearly impossible to cancel subscription to this app! I tried to follow the suggested instructions to cancel through Google Play, but the subscription doesn't even show up and yet I'm still being charged.

1★ · Google Play · 2026-07-28

Reports that the ads misrepresent the app

so disappointed that the app was not what was advertised and I paid a year for something that doesn't work for me. it's not too bad I've seen worse. I have several disabilities and restrictions. you're only allowed to select one area of…

1★ · Google Play · 2026-06-18

Updated: Advertised as an exercise game but does not look like what the ads show. However, I did find the game in Boosters and it's a really good workout for 3 minutes. I changed my rating to 4 because it's helpful and convenient and…

4★ · Google Play · 2026-07-25

FB ad was completely misleading. Seemed like a fun exercise app that incorporated fun phone play. It took a payment from me and it doesn't show as a subscription so I can't figure out how to cancel. Buyer BEWARE.

1★ · Google Play · 2026-06-19

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: 1.8.46 independent signals469 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.