We analyzed this app across 3 independent signals and corroborated nothing unfair. That is a signal, not an audit.
This analysis describes version 9.13.13 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 9.13.13, updated 2026-09-07.
What the analysis found
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.
Aggressive ad load
Was great until it was good — It was great until they updated & now you can’t do anything unless you watch an ad or spend coins. Used to be able to unlock word, play daily quiz & do gaps, now you have to choose 1 of the 3. Don’t like the…
Ai slop — Constant ads, ai images and way to expensive
Constant adds — I deleted this app because I had to watch an add or pay to get the word of the day. I just wanted to learn a new word every day if I missed a day ya ok I got to watch an add to get that one sure no problem but if I missed…
Trial converts to a charge
Scam — Tried to charge 22 bucks for free trial. Luckily I m poor and my card got declined otherwise I would be without 22 dollars after clearly reading “free trial for 7 days”. I hope you won’t take my last 22 dollars which I had under my…
Free Trial Charge — They actually charged me $10.91 for a 7 Day free trial. Dont trust them. Dont buy! Super upset.
Subscription Scam — Charged for Subscription EVEN THOUGH I CANCELLED FREE TRIAL THE SAME DAY I SIGNED UP FOR IT
Reports that the ads misrepresent the app
False advertising — App advertised one new word everyday in widgets. Instead it forces you to visit the app to find new words.
False advertising — I decided to add your app for the free 7day trial only for you all to try and charge me $58?? Right after I added the app, I cancelled. It showed as yesterday being canceled then you guys tried charging me and I can’t…
Bait and switch — I got this app, purely for the purpose of having it on my lock screen and giving me a new Word of the Day all of the time. But they just did an update and just changed it so that the lock screen just now shows you “click…
Paywall blocks the basics
Mediocre. — This app seems great at first: it’s engaging and fun, uses decently high level words, and has an EXP system like a classic game would. However, within barely a month of using it, I realize how simply annoying this app is…
Lost streak — App updated and I lost 200+ day streak that I now have to pay money to see the words
Don’t be fooled into purchasing a Premium Subscription — feel like I wasted my money on the premium subscription for this app. I loved it so much that I ended up buying a Lifetime Premium Subscription. However, after the recent updates…
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.