DiscoverBrowse CategoriesHow it worksMethodologyFor developers
ReceiptJar
THE U GROUP & CO LIMITED · Lifestyle

We analyzed this app across 3 independent signals and corroborated nothing unfair. That is a signal, not an audit.

Nothing unfair corroborated · unauditedConfidence: High3 signal sources516 reviews scannedNot human-reviewedas of 2026-10-04
 Which version this describes

This analysis describes version 16.1.0 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.

The store currently lists version 16.1.0, updated 2026-08-18.

What the analysis found

Each finding shows what agreed and how strongly. Automated analysis

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.

Reported by users: Tracking and data collection concerns
One source onlyShown, not confirmed — the only source is user reviews.view evidence
The app ships session-recording or a wide tracking stack, holds permissions that read personal data, or is reported by users to sell, leak or over-collect it. The evidence line says which of those was observed.
What we saw: Data & privacy concerns: raised by 5 distinct reviewers (1.0% of 516 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.

Tracking and data collection concerns

Don’t recommend — Required you to connect your email (so they can sell your data) to be able to cash out.

1★ · App Store · 2026-09-18

Terrible Costumer Service and suspended account if you start earning too much. — I am extremely disappointed with this app. I used ReceiptJar for over a year, during which they collected my receipt and shopping data with no issues. At…

1★ · App Store · 2026-01-17

Scam to sell your marketing info — Used this app and uploaded a lot of receipts from all 5 members in my household bc of Christmas shopping and then clearance shopping after Christmas. When I had enough points I submitted my redemption…

1★ · App Store · 2026-01-16

How the automated analysis works

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

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.

 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: 16.1.03 independent signals516 reviews scannedConfidence: HighNot human-reviewedVocabulary v1.13Methodology v1.3
Signals run: user reviews, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure. Not yet checked: SDKs in the app package, the app's own on-screen text and the app manifest.