We analyzed this app across 3 independent signals and corroborated nothing unfair. That is a signal, not an audit.
This analysis describes version 3.26.39 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 3.26.39, updated 2026-03-19.
What the analysis found
One source only — shown, not confirmed 3
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
Another Money-Hungry App — I am looking for a habit-tracking app that is easy to use, doesn't require a subscription, and doesn't force you to watch advertisements. This app asks you a couple of basic questions and then builds a…
Up-sells every time I open — Was excited about getting this app and integrating it into my life, but I’m going to have to delete it because every time I open the app, it shows a pop-up trying to get me to pay more $. I get that they gotta…
Every app creator wants a monthly ransom — I bought this app years ago and gave it good use. Now I need it again but I can't use it without lots of adds; now I find out they changed their model to a monthly payment. For a log timer????…
Price keeps rising
Price increase :( — I love this app. I’ve used it for 3 years. Which is why I’m really disappointed to cancel my subscription, because of the price increasing from $14.99 a year to $59.99 a year. Which is frankly ridiculous. It’s a good…
Huge price increase — The app developer owes an explanation for more than doubling the price of the annual subscription. What additional value will the app bring? What additional features will be added? Make it make sense. I’ve been a…
Okay, but not worth subscription increase — The app itself is okay. I found the interface a little unintuitive but workable. However, I got a notification that the subscription would be increasing to $59.99/year. I can’t remember if the…
Upgrade prompts use guilt-trip wording
Great app, wish they didn’t upsell plans so much — I really enjoy using this app for its simplicity and creative UI. It’s exactly what I need. However, one part I find annoying is that everytime I open the app, they show me the screen…
It’s ok — I downloaded the app a couple years ago but you can only have a couple habits and it is constantly asking you do get the subscription. But otherwise it’s good, I would just add more habits and get rid of some old ones.(that are…
Limited with big privacy issues — During the week-long free trial the app constantly badgers you to upgrade. It's set up as 'gamification' if your productivity and habits and it somewhat works, but gets tiresome as the app pushes the…
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.