DiscoverBrowse CategoriesHow it worksMethodologyFor developers
Period Tracker and Calendar
SimpleInnovation LLC · Health & Fitness

What’s the catch? Multiple ad networks bundled — measured, backed by SDKs in the app package.

Analyzed automatically from 6 independent signals that had to agree — not a hands-on test, and not human-reviewed.

2 on the catch list · analyzedConfidence: High6 signal sources1,049 reviews scannedNot human-reviewedas of 2026-10-04
 Which version this describes

App Store

This analysis describes version 13.3.0 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.

The store currently lists version 13.3.1, updated 2026-10-01.

The app has been updated since this analysis. The findings on this page describe version 13.3.0, not the version now listed on the store.

Release notes for the newer versions, in the developer’s own words:

Version 13.3.1 · 2026-10-01
– You can now give Premium as a gift! A whole year of access for someone you care about. You can attach a message with a few warm words. Cycle stats, insights, health reports, and not a single ad. Everything it takes to feel looked after, wrapped up in one gift. – App performance has been improved. – Fixed minor issues reported by users. – Please send us your feedback!

Google Play

This analysis describes version 13.2.0 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.

The store currently lists version 13.2.0, updated 2026-09-30.

What the analysis found

Each finding shows what agreed and how strongly. Automated analysis

The catch list 2

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.

Multiple ad networks bundled
Measuredfrom SDKs in the app packageartefact 55d2b953dce8…
The package embeds several distinct advertising or mediation SDKs — a stack built for ad volume, not for a single house ad.
What we saw: Bundles 5 distinct ad networks / mediation SDKs: AppLovin MAX, Fyber / Digital Turbine Exchange, Google Mobile Ads (AdMob / Ad Manager), Pangle (ByteDance) and 1 more
Price may differ from what you see here
Measuredfrom SDKs in the app packageartefact 55d2b953dce8…
The app ships a remote paywall-experimentation SDK, so the offer shown is configured server-side and may differ per user — including from anything we or a reviewer saw.
What we saw: Paywall is server-configured and A/B tested via RevenueCat Paywalls — the offer shown can differ per user

Context 1

Measured and published because a reader would want to know — deliberately not a charge. The measurement alone does not show a harm.

Cheapest and priciest options are far apart
MeasuredPublished as context — deliberately not a charge · from the store listingview evidence
The disclosed in-app purchases span an unusually wide price range. Published as context: the cheapest and priciest items may be different kinds of product entirely, so the spread alone deducts nothing.
What we saw: In-app purchases run from USD 2.49 to USD 69.99 — a 28x spread across 10 items

Positive evidence 1

Things this app does right, published at the same strengths as the catch list.

Developer says data deletion can be requested
Measuredfrom the store listingview evidence
The developer's data-safety disclosure on the store states that users can request deletion of their data, or the app's own text offers a way to delete the account. This restates what the developer declares; it is not a test of whether deletion works. Apple publishes no equivalent disclosure, so on an Apple-only listing only the app's own text can support it.
What we saw: The developer's store data-safety disclosure states that data deletion can be requested; we have not seen a deletion control in the app's own text

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.

Reported by users: Aggressive ad load
One source onlyShown, not confirmed — the only source is user reviews.view evidence
Advertising volume or placement that interrupts normal use: ads between every action, unskippable or forced full-screen ads.
What we saw: Aggressive ad load: raised by 7 distinct reviewers (1.3% of 519 reviews scanned)
In the app's own text: Paywall with no way past it
One source onlyShown, not confirmed — the only source is the app's own on-screen text.artefact 55d2b953dce8…
A paywall screen ships with no dismiss, skip or 'maybe later' affordance anywhere in the package, so the app's own text offers no way in without paying.
What we saw: Ships a purchase screen ("paywall") with no dismiss, skip or "continue free" text anywhere in the package
In the app's own text: A plan is pre-picked as 'recommended'
One source onlyShown, not confirmed — the only source is the app's own on-screen text.artefact 55d2b953dce8…
The purchase screen arrives with one plan already framed as the recommended or most popular choice, so the default is the app's preference rather than the user's. We do not compare the plans' prices, and only the app's own text evidences this, so it is shown, but never counted as a charge.
What we saw: Purchase screen steers the choice: "BEST DEAL"
Reported by users: Users describe the free version as usable
One source onlyShown, not confirmed — the only source is user reviews.view evidence
Reviewers repeatedly say the free version is worth using on its own. Nothing we can measure corroborates that — a free listing with in-app purchases looks identical whether the free tier is generous or a demo — so this is published as what reviewers say, not as a measured credit.
What we saw: Reviewers describe the free version as usable: raised by 5 distinct reviewers (1.0% of 519 reviews scanned)

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

I've been using this app for 6 years now and loved it but it has so many ads built in now that it is not enjoyable and I must look for an other app...

3★ · Google Play · 2026-08-29

this has way to many ads. and looses my data constantly. for someone who is irregular it's scary because you can't find when your last period was and if you can find it you have to go through 5 ads to get to it.

1★ · Google Play · 2026-09-12

The extremely intrusive full screen ads are getting ridiculous and I'm considering uninstalling.

1★ · Google Play · 2026-08-29

Users describe the free version as usable

it's a really nice app. It lets you track your mood and different symptoms. It also lets you know when you should start your ovulation period. I'm not sure what is available if you pay for more features. But you really don't have to pay…

5★ · Google Play · 2026-07-29

Review — I love this app it’s super helpful I just wish we didn’t have to pay to get certain information or features!

5★ · App Store · 2026-02-18

This app is so good and must download it! — Okay so quick story.... I got my period last year so I was 10 and I just used some random period track apps and gurl... They rather sign me out or I have to pay the subscription. But this one…

5★ · App Store · 2025-05-26

What this app sells

Every purchase the store discloses. Store listing
 What this app sells
Google Play doesn’t publish per-purchase prices, so this list covers the other store only.

How the automated analysis works

Automated, corroborated, and never human-reviewed without a person.

This assessment is produced automatically. Six independent signals are read — user reviews, SDKs in the app package, the app's own on-screen text, the app manifest, 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.

 Not yet human-reviewed

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.

 How this page was produced
Analyzed 2026-10-04 Version analyzed: 13.3.0 (App Store), 13.2.0 (Google Play)6 independent signals1,049 reviews scannedConfidence: HighNot human-reviewedVocabulary v1.13Methodology v1.3
Signals run: user reviews, SDKs in the app package, the app's own on-screen text, the app manifest, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure.