Analyzed automatically. Assessed 2026-10-05 from 976 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.
App Store
This analysis describes version 18.0.2 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 18.0.2, updated 2026-09-12.
Google Play
This analysis describes version v17.12.72038-googleRelease of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version v17.12.72038-googleRelease, 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.
Aggressive ad load
Bankrupt 2024. It used to be better. Navigation doesn't work half the time, search is slow and glitches, constant ads for premium. I used it in the Himalayas a decade ago, now it fails in US national parks. ok for a backup but I download…
I don't like when I open a map I get pop up ads while I'm on the go (biking driving etc)
Every thing is paid — TL;DR: Maps.me's update ruined the app with paid features and restrictions. I switched to Organic Maps, which is free, respects privacy, has no ads, and offers unlimited downloads. It's everything Maps.me used to be…
Paywall blocks the basics
Bought this app over 10 years ago, now features are behind obnoxious paywall — I paid for this app a long long time ago. No restrictions on functionality like how many offline maps can be downloaded. I decided to use the app on a trip…
Not Actually Free — I downloaded the app because it was well-starred and clearly states ‘Free to download and use’. This is at best partly true. You are constantly hit with popups for the ‘Pro’ version and the free version is crippled to…
Now you have to pay?! — They probably charge now because now the U.S. National Parks app allows you to download park maps (FREE) and the NP system is where we usually lose service, right? Sneaky that this developer is not putting “in app…
What this app sells
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.