Analyzed automatically. Assessed 2026-10-06 from 1,112 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 1.20.0 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-06 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 1.20.0, updated 2026-09-30.
Google Play
This analysis describes version 1.20.1 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 1.20.1, updated 2026-10-02.
What the analysis found
Context 1
Measured and published because a reader would want to know — deliberately not a charge. The measurement alone does not show a harm.
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
you have to watch an ad after EVERY SINGLE FREAKING BINGO GAME. ANNOYING!!! I am UNINSTALLING.
too many ads and getting bingo on the first number called is a complete lie. Definitely bots, also trying to complete levels and constant duplicate properties. like seriously, this is not a fun game. don't waste your time and buying into…
Probably one of the most pointless and boring games I've ever played. Survey app sent me to it to make money but the way it's done you cannot make money. If you win which is based purely on luck you usually don't even get the flag to…
Pay to progress
terrible game, impossible to progress past the first few levels without spending a bunch of money. why would I give money money to such a poorly designed gamed?
Frustrating to play. Powerups get stuck behind pay walls, the card variety to actually complete collections and move on is terrible, and it's incredibly pay to win. If not for freecash, I would have already uninstalled.
Pay to win, scripted garbage — I hate these pay to win games that are ridiculously scripted. Everything to rewards, balls dropped, opponents… it’s all scripted. They turned a fun game into an absolute cash grab which ruins the entire…
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.
Show 5 more purchases we couldn’t categorise
These are really on sale; we just can’t tell from the name whether they recur.
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.