We analyzed this app across 3 independent signals and corroborated nothing unfair. That is a signal, not an audit.
This analysis describes version 1.9.22 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 1.9.22, updated 2026-09-28.
What the analysis found
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
Good just wish it was free — Too many ads I fear
Hi — Too many ads for payment, and premium bla bla bla, good app overall never going to need to buy premium cuz it’s already what I want it to be
Great, but so many pop ups — I can get by the pop ups for subscriptions and the ads, but I will say they are excessive. Otherwise great app, I like the number of customizations with photos and times
Paywall blocks the basics
NOT FREE — Why not charge to download the app to begin with. If you have to pay to use. You can’t do anything without paying
Great app — 5/5 works great and you don’t need to pay for basic stuff
new subscription? — it used to be free and then all the sudden canceled my countdown and made me start a subscription
Users describe the free version as usable
Just right! — Just the right amount of information and not too overwhelming. Free version is great
Don’t have to pay! — Love this app because you don’t have to pay for multiple widgets on your home screen and lots of different customizations!!!
Great — For what this is? It’s great and you don’t HAVE to pay to reap the benefits.
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.
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.