We analyzed this app across 3 independent signals and corroborated nothing unfair. That is a signal, not an audit.
This analysis describes version 5.10 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 5.10, updated 2026-02-03.
What the analysis found
One source only — shown, not confirmed 4
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.
Trial converts to a charge
Scam — I got charged when I was told I was signing up for a free trial week
SCAMMERS! — It said 3 day free trial, I deleted the app right away from my subscriptions and still charged me 37 dollars and they are not refunding my money. I want my money back immediately
There is no "Free Trial" — The 3-day free trial is false advertising-- they WILL charge you right then for the full year $36.99 subscription. When you try to cancel before the 3 days, the App Store just cancels the auto-renewal for next…
Hard to cancel
Did not function as advertising — Did not work. I attempted to share a document by email. It is hard to cancel subscription.
No way to cancel trial — I do not want this program and trying to figure out how to cancel the trial. I do not want the subscription.
Don’t like the app — You can’t cancel the subscription
Reports that the ads misrepresent the app
There is no "Free Trial" — The 3-day free trial is false advertising-- they WILL charge you right then for the full year $36.99 subscription. When you try to cancel before the 3 days, the App Store just cancels the auto-renewal for next…
Bait and switch — Be prepared to pay if you want to send doc.
Ad lied. — I can’t find any where in Settings to cancel the free trial. The ad said it was easy to do. Not so.
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.