Analyzed automatically. Assessed 2026-10-04 from 416 user reviews, the store listing and its privacy label. We have not scanned the app's package, so nothing on this page was read from inside the app itself.
This analysis describes version 26.8.471 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 26.8.471, updated 2026-09-14.
What the analysis found
Positive evidence 1
Things this app does right, published at the same strengths as the catch list.
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.
Paywall blocks the basics
This used to be the best app for reading Manhwa, and I absolutely loved it. I would've given 5 stars in a heartbeat. Unfortunately, it is so expensive now. I don't mind paying for the subscription every month; but now you have to pay…
It went downhill when the gem system was incorporated. It used to be my favorite way to read web comics and I was happy to pay for the subscription when it allowed access to ALL the stories but putting so many of them (especially the good…
I had this app for a long time and as soon as the subscription service started I knew it was the begining of the end. it does have great content but it's all behind a paywall now. what really solidified my decision to delete the app was…
Price keeps rising
I used to love reading from this app, but now they raised the prices of each episode to 10 times more than they used to. Episodes used to be 5 to 6 gems, and now they are 50 to 60. This is definitely a money grabbing tactic. They are…
Gems killed the experience I have been with manta for quite some time, at least a good couple of years. Unfortunately, on this newly based gem charge system it just seems like they're in it for the money, they're no longer in it for the…
used to be a good app, the amount of recent translation errors, spelling and grammar mistakes have made me finally cancel my subscription. This is no longer a budget friendly webcomic/manhwa app due to the subscription price increase and…
What this app sells
From the store listing. Billing terms are read from each purchase’s name — the stores don’t publish them — so treat them as a strong hint, not a disclosure.
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.