Analyzed automatically. Assessed 2026-10-04 from 534 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 1.108.0 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 1.108.1, updated 2026-09-29.
The app has been updated since this analysis. The findings on this page describe version 1.108.0, not the version now listed on the store.
Release notes for the newer versions, in the developer’s own words:
Version 1.108.1 · 2026-09-29
No release notes were provided for this version.
What the analysis found
The catch list 1
Charges we publish at a strength we stand behind: measured from an artefact, agreed by independent sources, or reported by enough users to clear that charge's own published bar.
Positive evidence 1
Things this app does right, published at the same strengths as the catch list.
One source only — shown, not confirmed 1
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
I was using this app mainly to keep track of my weight and to see changes week by week and now suddenly in my 3rd trimester the weight option is behind a paywall. there were already a lot of things behind a paywall, fine. but to change…
was really enjoying this app the past few years, tracking ovulation and then my first pregnancy. I love this app for the Week by week tracking as it gives some of the best detail, but between Aug 24 and Aug 25 they locked the weekly…
Update: Got what I thought was a helpful reply from Lesley below but when I contacted through the app they just listed the features now behind the paywall and told me to get a membership... what a waste of time. Original review: I used to…
Aggressive ad load
The apps info and assistance is great but the ads are too much. Every time I want to capture a test, a page pops up to pay for the premium version & I cannot get to where I want to go. It has become highly frustrating. I have to keep…
This app is okay but for how expensive the membership ship is, I would expect less pop ups. I should not have to worry about clicking a pop up by accident and getting taken to Amazon while I'm trying to get pictures of my ovulation test…
Taking features your users already had away and hiding them behind a paywall is stupid. To new users, you no longer can predict ovulation or see your graphs. If you're gonna pay for something, try inito. It is way better and way more…
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.