Editorial standards

What we evaluate

We look at the training decisions an app makes for you, the decisions you still own, its programming style, logging and progression tools, price, platform availability, AI use, and important limitations. The best app depends on the person using it; a longer feature list is not automatically a better fit.

How a review begins

We start with official product websites, app store listings, pricing pages, privacy documents, and available support information. We note the source, date, region, and access tier behind important claims. A developer submission starts research; it does not verify a claim or guarantee testing, a listing, or publication.

What hands-on testing covers

When hands-on access is practical, a normal catalog review allows about 60 to 90 minutes of use: one representative path through the product, one reasonable retry if blocked, and one obvious alternative route if available. We may stop sooner when the main experience and its tradeoff are clear. We do not require repeated workouts, special test access, or an unreleased build to write a qualified profile. If an important feature cannot be reached, we disclose that limit instead of calling it broken or verified.

What counts as evidence

We separate what we observed in the app from what an official source documents, what a developer reports, and what we infer editorially. An unresolved or untested claim is qualified or left out. Published privacy terms and visible controls inform our assessment, but we do not certify an app's underlying data handling, security, or legal compliance. A review is a bounded assessment, not an exhaustive product audit.

Three different scores

App Fit is personal to a visitor's finder answers. It is not a universal quality ranking. Legit Score and Originality & Identity are separate editorial assessments on a 100-point scale. The full dimensions, weighting, evidence rules, and legacy-profile limits are explained on our How we score page.

• Legit Score averages five equally weighted dimensions: core execution, usability, reliability, value, and support/privacy.
• Originality & Identity averages five equally weighted dimensions: original mechanics, product point of view, visual identity, meaningful differentiation, and defensibility.

Each dimension needs a reason grounded in available evidence. Missing evidence is not treated as a product failure, but it cannot justify a high band that requires demonstrated, repeatable performance. An app can be well made without being especially original, or distinctive without being the right fit for you.

Confidence and review status

Where shown, confidence describes how much evidence supports an assessment, not how good the app is. Low means important paths or repeatability remain untested. Moderate means the main path and some return use or history were examined, with key commercial and policy facts cross-checked. High requires multiple representative sessions or workflows and independent checks of major claims. High should be uncommon for a catalog review.

A Reviewed label means the editor approved the evidence-backed profile; it does not mean every feature or platform was tested. Earlier public profiles remain visible while they are reassessed and may still say Researching or Evaluation ready. Their scores are preliminary and should not be read as newly reviewed under this process.

Developer participation and publication

Developer participation is not required before publication. We may ask a focused factual question, but we do not provide routine review updates, negotiate scores in advance, or offer prepublication approval. A developer's response to our editorial outreach does not improve the support score. If a product changes, we consider the verified change in the relevant product dimension. The editor approves a reviewed profile, and publication is a separate decision.

Advertising and ownership

Ads help keep Workout App Index free. Advertisers cannot buy a listing, a higher score, or placement in finder results. Ads are labeled and kept separate from app recommendations. Workout App Index and The Lift League are both owned by Turf King LLC; Caliper Cal is another Turf King product. Any WAI-owned app is evaluated under the same criteria, and shared ownership is disclosed in its profile.

Private developer audits

A developer may separately purchase a private positioning audit. Payment never affects whether WAI selects or publishes an app, its scores or ranking, or our editorial conclusions. Submitting an app remains free and does not require an audit.

Updates and corrections

Apps change. We review documented corrections and update profiles when the evidence supports a change. A new fact does not automatically change a score. If you find an error, please use our corrections form and include a source we can check.