Evidence, judgment and what we cannot know.

Four kinds of statements

• Platform requirements: linked to the relevant Apple or Google documentation and checked against the stated date.
• Public observations: tied to a named listing, market and observation date when available.
• Hypotheses and opinion: proposed interpretations or tests, not claims that a result has already occurred.
• Illustrative examples: invented scenarios used to explain a method, clearly identified as such.

Public teardowns are not client case studies

A public page does not reveal private conversion rates, hidden keyword fields, retained-user value or who performed an agency’s work. Unless explicitly supported by documented evidence, those facts are unknown. Mentioning an app does not imply a client relationship or endorsement.

How the app audits earn their score

Five criteria, each worth zero, one or two points. The total is the verdict out of ten. Zero means the point is not earned, one means useful but incomplete, and two means clearly demonstrated in the captured opening. A famous name, an attractive interface or an award does not earn an automatic pass.

Each criterion asks a different question. A missing completed workflow does not cancel readable design, a relevant benefit or useful product content. We credit appropriate emotional appeal, trust and recognisable identity without treating a famous brand as proof of performance. A sequence may show several useful capabilities; it does not have to be a three-frame onboarding tutorial. These are the scoring anchors:

• Reason to care. Does the opening communicate a relevant benefit or experience to its intended visitor?
  0. 0/2: The intended benefit is absent, confusing or contradicted by the example.
  1. 1/2: A relevant purpose, emotional appeal or category benefit is clear, but broad or delayed.
  2. 2/2: A specific and credible reason to care is clear immediately, with a fitting example.
• Product evidence. What useful product content, action or result can the visitor actually inspect?
  0. 0/2: No meaningful product content, action or result is visible.
  1. 1/2: Useful content or a feature is visible, but its detail, consequence or context is incomplete.
  2. 2/2: A meaningful action, result or directly useful piece of information is clearly demonstrated.
• Readable at a glance. Can the visitor read the main message and inspect the relevant evidence at gallery size?
  0. 0/2: The main message and useful evidence are substantially obscured or unreadable.
  1. 1/2: The main message or overall interface is identifiable, but useful detail needs enlargement.
  2. 2/2: The message and meaningful supporting detail have a clear, readable hierarchy.
• A useful sequence. Does each frame add useful information for the chosen audience?
  0. 0/2: The opening repeats the same job or contradicts itself without useful progression.
  1. 1/2: Frames add relevant information, but repetition, order or audience changes weaken the connection.
  2. 2/2: Each frame has a clear new job and the progression or deliberate variety makes sense.
• A reason to choose. Is there a concrete reason this audience might prefer this experience?
  0. 0/2: No specific distinction is communicated beyond an unsupported superiority claim.
  1. 1/2: A relevant mechanism, content identity, theme, workflow or trust cue is present but underexplained.
  2. 2/2: A specific distinction is clear and convincingly supported by the captured example.

We examine the first three captured still screenshots alongside the public name and subtitle. Benefit clarity, selective zooms, readable type, useful visual variety and a coherent sequence matter. Different colours do not earn points by themselves. A repeated layout is a problem when it repeats the same message or obscures a useful distinction. Social proof earns credit when it supports a specific, accurately scoped proposition. A logo or an unverified superlative is not evidence of a customer result.

A call to action should make a supported next step clear. It need not be a literal download button inside every screenshot. Urgency must reflect a real condition; outcome or health claims need appropriate support. We do not invent demand, conversion losses or private keyword performance from public creative.

Every score breakdown explains the five point allocations and gives frame-specific changes. The 25 October 2026 reassessment replaced the earlier generous verdicts across all 100 audits. Its date is shown separately from the original evidence capture date. Videos, later screenshots, other storefronts and private results are outside that scored sample. A revised capture or better evidence can change the judgment.

Changes to creative should be assessed against the actual audience. Apple’s product-page guidance and product page optimization documentation explain supported presentation and testing options.

Tools expose their limits

Field and image checks are preparation aids. They do not guarantee approval or ranking gains. Scenario calculators operate on your assumptions. Audit worksheets record your assessment, rather than claiming to measure an app automatically. Review the linked platform requirements before submission.

Commercial interest and existing reviews

Gabriel offers independent ASO services and competes with some providers discussed here. Provider comparisons summarize linked public positioning and identify questions to ask about the proposed scope. The October 2026 revision removes the earlier speculative staffing, pricing and cost-allocation claims from published comparison pages. A source check is not verification of private delivery results; unavailable or insufficient source material is identified. Market guides help buyers compare responsibilities rather than present unsourced local fee averages.

Dates and corrections

A content date records a substantive edit or check, not a guarantee that every linked source will remain unchanged. Platform features and commercial offers can change. If you spot an error, send the page URL, disputed statement and supporting source to gabriel@asoprofessional.com.

Choose useful next steps

Use the guides for reference, the tools for practical preparation and the course for a learning sequence. Ask for a defined professional scope when a decision needs deeper evidence or specialist execution.