Analyzed automatically. Assessed 2026-10-04 from 935 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 4.21.37 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 4.21.37, updated 2026-10-02.
Google Play
This analysis describes version 4.21.36 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 4.21.36, updated 2026-09-16.
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
The free version is kind of pointless, in my opinion. Just lists of meals you can add to a "plan". It does give you a grocery list, which is why I gave it two stars, but I can just as easily find recipes and add items to my app grocery…
The free version is pointless. Spent the time to enter all my preferences and then went and looked at what meals I could add. All of the meals were part of the pro version, so you have to pay for any recipes.
Don’t waste your time unless you want to spend money on another subscription — Every single breakfast option is locked behind a paywall, and there’s no way to filter out Pro recipes. Everything about this app is clearly intended to make…
Users describe the free version as usable
Exceptional ease of use, and just what I was looking for in a meal planning app. I've used both the paid and free versions, neither of which disappoint. The app doesn't bombard you with ads while using the free version, which is amazing…
Mealime is one of the most well organized and user-friendly meal planning apps I’ve used. The range of recipes is great, and the layout makes it super easy to find inspiration when I’m not sure what to cook. I love that it’s ad-free and…
I love this app! so worth it to help you plan your meals and order the groceries all in one it's seriously the best! The meals are also absolutely delicious and use very simple ingredients usually. I've recommended this app to many…
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.