Analyzed automatically. Assessed 2026-10-06 from 2,938 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 30.9.1 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-06 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 30.9.1, updated 2026-09-30.
Google Play
This analysis describes version 30.9.5 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 30.9.5, updated 2026-10-02.
What the analysis found
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.
Positive evidence 1
Things this app does right, published at the same strengths as the catch list.
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.
Aggressive ad load
Ok, I've written a review for this app 3 times. Picsart used to be a creative and fascinating for editors, meaning you could create a picture whatever you liked without using AI, but now, it's almost full of AI slop when you open Picsart…
unusable. Telling me to pay for premium and restricting the download, though i didn't use any premium features. Also packed with endless ads. Not recommending at all
There are too many ads when I try to be done and move on to the next step,asking for pro every ad
Paywall blocks the basics
Terrible nowadays. They hide nearly every useful feature behind a paywall and tell you that you need to pay for premium features to download your work even when you aren't using premium features. They want 10 dollars a month for simply…
need to pay for everything
This used to be a good app, now you have to pay for stuff that used to be free and it's filled with ai. Very disappointed.
Trial converts to a charge
Picsart automatically deducted ₱1,299 from my wallet. I had a 3-day free trial, but they charged me without any prior notice or biometric verification. I did not authorize the payment. I requested a refund, but my request was declined. I…
Hi, I was recently charged 1, 299 even though I do not have an active subscription. I only signed up for the 3-day free trial and was not aware that it would automatically renew. Without any notice, the amount was deducted from my GCash…
Scam — I tried the free trial and it instantly charged me 40 bucks. Stay away
Hard to cancel
can't cancel the subscriptions how horrible, even in google playstore i can't cancel it
Pay per edit — Been using PicsArt for years and enjoyed it but I’m disappointed they’ve switched to hidden costs and tokens even though I paid for a YEAR. Deleted, unsubscribed and looking for a new app with NO HIDDEN COSTS. Avoid this bs.
Reports of unexpected charges
Hello, I was unable to install the app, and I already unsubscribed. However, I noticed that a payment was still processed through GCash. I did not intend to continue the subscription. Please check the transaction and process a refund for…
False Advertising! in the description it clearly says free trial. however there's no free trial. they get your money and there's no refund. no anything available after I use the app for a few minutes. I would have paid $0.50 for it, let…
⭐ 1 star I was charged ₱1,299 even though I had already cancelled my subscription more than 24 hours before the charge. I made sure to unsubscribe in advance, so I don’t understand why I was still charged after cancelling. This is…
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.