We analyzed this app across 3 independent signals and corroborated nothing unfair. That is a signal, not an audit.
This analysis describes version 1.22.1 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 1.22.1, updated 2026-09-28.
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.
Trial converts to a charge
Garbage and a Scam — Charged me immediately for the 3 day free trial and then didn’t work at all.
scammers — they charge you regardless if you choose free trial or not because the unsubscribe button doesn't exist until the free trial is over. actual garbage scum scammers.
DO NOT GET THE APP — I clicked the free trial and only used this app once, I pressed the cancel subscription and it keeps charging me, I am tired of continuing to getting charged. Please cancel my subscription.
Hard to cancel
Beware — I did not mean to download this and now I can’t cancel it. DO NOT DOWNLOAD.
Trying to opt out — I tried this app. It works but it’s very laggy. I tried to cancel and I couldn’t find anywhere to opt out. I ask for app support and it took me to a different place unrelated, asking if I wanted to join the team. Very…
They will continue to rob you — Never used the app but they rob me once a week and won’t let me unsubscribe
What this app sells
From the store listing. Billing terms are read from each purchase’s name — the stores don’t publish them — so treat them as a strong hint, not a disclosure.
Show 1 more purchase we couldn’t categorise
These are really on sale; we just can’t tell from the name whether they recur.
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.