ASO AgencyEducation · US iPhone listing
Does their ASO suck?
Listing creative score · first three captured iPhone screenshots
6/10Useful. Still leaving too much unsaid.
Brilliant actually shows the learner doing something and getting help. That earns credit. The sequence still changes exercises before one interaction reaches a useful conclusion, then adds institutional name-dropping to the mix.
Gab’s verdict · 6/10Gabriel Machuret
One storefront, one language and a dated capture. This is an independent editorial audit, not a client case study.
Gab’s take · Five criteria. Two points each.
The exercises and guidance are real teaching proof. That is stronger than a credential headline. Make one example easier to follow and give the broader subject claim the space it needs. Improve it by carrying one exercise through attempt, guidance and understanding. Enlarge the key interaction and either show coding or narrow the opening proposition. The product proof is more persuasive than the credential headline.
The maths example gives the tutor pitch a relevant foundation. The broader maths-and-coding promise outruns the captured demonstration, however: the opening shows no coding example. That earns partial, not full, benefit credit.
Exercises, guidance and learner attempts demonstrate actual interaction.
Small captions and helper text need stronger selective emphasis.
Different exercises show capability without completing one learning journey.
Visual guidance differentiates; credentials are supporting publisher claims.
0: not earned · 1: useful but incomplete · 2: clearly demonstrated. Judged on the dated opening creative; public metadata provides context. These points assess creative execution, not private conversion or ranking performance. Read the scoring criteria · See all ten verdict levels
Inspect the numbered original, read the problem, then compare the proposed fix. The publisher’s creative stays unchanged.
What the visitor sees → what I’d change
Look at the original: The helper proposes visualising the displayed expression.
Why I’m flagging it: The useful area model competes with small explanatory content.
Enlarge the authentic expression-to-visual relationship and simplify its caption.
What the visitor sees → what I’d change
Look at the original: The example directs another learner action instead of displaying only a final answer.
Why I’m flagging it: The fraction task changes subject before the first example resolves.
Continue the same exercise through a useful hint and retry.
What the visitor sees → what I’d change
Look at the original: The frame combines a credential claim with an illustrated answer and reward state.
Why I’m flagging it: A third maths example leaves the coding promise unsupported visually.
Show the completed learning step or a genuine coding example, with truthful credential context.
Proposed copy for discussion. These are not current listing fields or tested winners.
Observed listing
Your personal tutor
Proposed alternative
Explore with visual lessons
Name 30/30 · Subtitle 27/30 charactersKeep the explicit subject coverage and describe the visible teaching format. The proposed subtitle gives a newcomer a concrete experience to picture without promising achievement or implying a human tutor.
The tradeoff: It reduces the prominence of personal tutoring, which may be central to the current positioning, and leaves coding proof to the creative. Validate the current format and audience response before replacing the existing subtitle.
Read the sequence from top to bottom on mobile, left to right on desktop. These are message-layout sketches, not screens from Brilliant or tested results.
Proposed headline
Put this in the frame: An authentic current math problem and visual hint, with the learner’s starting state clear.
Why it earns the space: Retain the strongest demonstrated format.
Proposed headline
Put this in the frame: The verified response and hint loop from that same problem.
Why it earns the space: Show participation without treating a correct sample answer as evidence of learning gains.
Proposed headline
Put this in the frame: A current coding exercise with a real hint and correction step.
Why it earns the space: Give the second subject in the headline equivalent product proof.
The test: Does adding a concrete coding example improve understanding of subject coverage without weakening math comprehension? The sketch gives the designer a direction; the actual product and access conditions decide what can ship.
Bring the listing. I’ll help you decide what to keep, what to fix and what to test.
Observed competitor metadata
You can learn anything
Khan Academy uses the broad You can learn anything proposition.
The lesson: Breadth is not proof of identical coverage or teaching quality. Brilliant’s visual hint-and-retry interaction can be explained on its own terms.
Observed competitor metadata
Walk into every test ready
Quizlet positions beyond flashcards with test-readiness language.
The lesson: Revision and practice overlap with learning intent, but a personal tutoring workflow is a different proposition. Show what happens when the learner is stuck.
Observed competitor metadata
Languages, Math, Music & Chess
Duolingo lists languages, math, music and chess.
The lesson: This is adjacent daily-learning competition with some math overlap, not a like-for-like coding tutor. Demonstrate Brilliant’s subject and interaction fit rather than borrowing engagement claims.
Intent candidates grounded in the listing—not fabricated search-volume or difficulty scores.
Visitor’s job: Understand and practise a mathematical concept.
Evidence: All three captured stills use mathematical representations.
Decision: Retain the explicit subject and show a verified learner action; no improvement rate or universal learning-style claim is inferred.
Visitor’s job: Practise programming with help when stuck.
Evidence: Coding appears in the observed name and first headline, but not in the first three examples.
Decision: Verify current coding coverage and demonstrate one actual task before expanding this proposition.
Visitor’s job: Receive guidance during an exercise rather than only consume an explanation.
Evidence: The examples show prompts, visual guidance and feedback.
Decision: Check supported interactions and plan access; do not imply a human tutor, guaranteed accuracy or universal curriculum coverage.
The unseen keyword field may already cover some of these terms. Build an evidence-backed keyword shortlist before making a metadata change.
Three 2024–2025 accounts were selected for incremental learning, cumulative review and differences between subjects. They may describe an earlier product experience and do not validate the current tutor. A 2026 account making broad offline and outcome claims was not selected as corroboration; neither old nor recent review claims establish current features without verification.
Sample: 3 selected accounts from 8 displayed reviews. Dates: 9 January 2024–7 April 2025. No sentiment percentage is calculated.
10 February 2024 · 4/5 stars
“small steps”
A February 2024 reviewer valued incremental courses and wanted a notes or concept-reference feature.
What I’d investigate: The reviewer also states that completed sections can be revisited. Preserve that distinction rather than claiming review was impossible.
Listing review source · Review ID 109237099307 April 2025 · 3/5 stars
“ongoing summary review”
An April 2025 reviewer liked the explanations but wanted cumulative review and reported a removed course.
What I’d investigate: Verify current course availability and review controls; an old catalogue report is not a present coverage finding.
Listing review source · Review ID 125136190159 January 2024 · 4/5 stars
“visualize mathematical concepts”
A January 2024 reviewer liked visual math explanations but found a logic course less supported.
What I’d investigate: Treat this as a subject-consistency research question, not proof of comparative teaching quality or the tutor experience shown in today’s creative.
Listing review source · Review ID 10800687756A displayed review can be old, unusually positive or internally inconsistent with its star rating. These accounts suggest questions; they do not establish current defects or typical customer experience. Use the Review Research Desk to keep evidence and interpretation separate.
The useful area model competes with small explanatory content.
Deliverable: Enlarge the authentic expression-to-visual relationship and simplify its caption.
Creative brief and current-product checkThe fraction task changes subject before the first example resolves.
Deliverable: Continue the same supported exercise through a useful hint and retry.
Creative brief and current-product checkA third maths example leaves the coding promise unsupported visually.
Deliverable: Show the completed learning step or a genuine coding example, with truthful credential context.
Creative brief and current-product checkDoes adding a concrete coding example improve understanding of subject coverage without weakening math comprehension?
Check Apple’s current product page optimization guidance and custom product page guidance before configuring a test. Write your experiment brief.
1–3: thumbs down · 4–6: thumbs up and down · 7–10: thumbs up
The basics need a serious rethink.
Too many obvious things have been left unfinished.
There is a useful product here. The listing needs to show it.
Some basics work, but the opening wastes attention and under-explains the benefit.
There is usable creative here, but too much of the sales argument is left to the visitor.
Real strengths, undermined by meaningful gaps in the opening story or execution.
A clear, useful demonstration with specific refinements still needed.
The main promise is clear and supported. Refinement matters more than reinvention.
Clear positioning, thoughtful choices and very few loose ends.
An unusually clear, convincing storefront worth learning from.
An editorial verdict on the captured storefront, not a measured ASO score or an assessment of an agency’s private work.
No private analytics, search-rank dataset or internal keyword field was supplied. Review quotations are short excerpts; explanations are our summaries. App names and screenshots belong to their respective owners. We are not affiliated with Brilliant. Read our editorial methodology.
Your app. Your priorities.
Send your listing, market and the problem you want to solve. I’ll explain the scope and fee before work starts. Your budget should buy decisions, not a longer PDF.
Build a relevant keyword shortlist, plan your screenshot sequence or get help with the creative decisions.
