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.
This analysis describes version 9.19.2 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 9.21.2, updated 2026-09-24.
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 2
Things this app does right, published at the same strengths as the catch list.
One source only — shown, not confirmed 5
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.
Tracking and data collection concerns
this app used to be great. since they added AI they have made the app less usable. paying for premium just gives you more of the features that make the app horrible and doesn't even opt you out of selling your data. home screen is a waste…
The new silent setting that now shares your data without you knowing to a very long list of vendors is very sneaky - CAREFUL EVERYONE, even if you turn off, there are vendors that auto turn back on - was a good app until they sold their…
Wants to sell your data. I paid to stop adverts and help the developer. However, once, every week or so a full screen permission page keeps popping up wanting your permission to share your data with hundreds of other companies. I…
Aggressive ad load
this used to be a very good app, but nowadays it exaggerates with full screen ads which renders the app practically unusable.
Good for shopping lists but the badly timed pop up ads are a pain. Just be aware that when you close the app after checking that you've got everything on your list, the ads take over just as you are stood at the checkout ready to pay by…
My go to list maker, free version doesn't have that many ads but premium isn't too expensive when on sale for those that want it. Love the cross platform sync the most, allows me to make detailed lists on my PC then use my phone in stores…
What this app sells
How the automated analysis works
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.
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.