Face Rating Apps and Age Ratings: The Store Data

Appearance scoring apps assign a number to a face, and a store age rating states which ages the store considers the app suitable for. This study records how those two facts sit next to each other, listing by listing. It makes no claim about any developer's intent. Every cell in the table below was read from a public store page on the date shown, and the full dataset ships as a CSV you can download.

What We Recorded, and How

We collected 20 public store listings for apps whose names or descriptions offer face rating, attractiveness scoring, or beauty analysis: 9 from Apple's App Store and 11 from Google Play. For each listing we recorded the store, the app name, the developer shown, the displayed age or content rating, and a short phrase from the listing's own text showing that the app scores appearance. Every listing was fetched on 2 September 2026, and each row of the dataset carries its listing URL and fetch date. No listing in the final set was unreachable, and nothing was estimated: an app we could not fetch would have been excluded, not guessed.

The Ratings, App by App

What the Stores Say Those Ratings Mean

The definitions below come from each store's own published rating documentation, fetched the same day as the listings. Apple's reference states that apps rated 4+ "contain no objectionable material," and that 18+ marks content that "may not be suitable for children under the age of 18." Google Play's documentation describes the Everyone band as content that is "generally suitable for all ages." Those are the stores' words, quoted so the table above can be read against the systems that produced it. Both source documents are linked in full under Sources.

The Same App, Two Answers

One app appears in both columns of this study. Umax, by Improvement Tech LLC, was rated 18+ on the App Store and Everyone on Google Play when both listings were recorded on 2 September 2026. The two stores run different rating systems with different bands and different processes, and this study records the outcome, not the reasoning behind either label. The recorded fact stands on its own: on the same day, the same face rating app was labeled adults-only on one store and suitable for all ages on the other.

What This Study Does Not Claim

• It does not claim any rating is wrong. Each store's system produced each label, and the table records the result.
• It does not claim any developer sought a particular rating. Nothing here speaks to intent.
• It does not measure app content beyond the listing page. What an app shows after install is outside this dataset.
• It is a snapshot. Ratings and listings change; the fetch date on every row is part of the data.
• It is not a safety verdict. Whether appearance scoring suits a particular child is a question for families and clinicians, not for a store label or for this table.

For the record: the instrument on this site is a website, not a store app, so no store age band applies to it. Its terms require buyers of the one paid product to be 18 or older, and the free scan runs in the browser and stores nothing.