Most face-rating apps are free to scan and paid to see the result. That's the pattern behind almost every "why isn't this free" complaint in this category: the upload works, the analysis runs, and the number appears behind a subscription at the exact moment you're most curious. Here's what each major tool actually charges for, and what "free" means in each case.

Pricing models checked September 2026. App-store subscription prices change often and vary by region — treat the model as reliable and any specific figure as something to verify before paying.

The four pricing models

Before the tools themselves, it helps to know the shapes:

  • Genuinely free, web-based. Full result, no account, no payment. Usually funded by ads or by being a side project.
  • Free scan, paid result. The scan runs; the score or breakdown requires a subscription. The most common model in mobile looksmaxxing apps.
  • Free trial into subscription. Often a 3-day trial that auto-converts. The trial is the sales mechanism, not the product.
  • Paid report. No free tier at all — you're buying an analysis, often human-reviewed.

Tool by tool

PrettyScale — free, web-based. Runs in the browser with no account. You place guide lines on your own face manually, which makes it slower and more subjective than automated landmark detection, but the result is free and there's no paywall. It's also refreshingly blunt in its own disclaimer about not starting if you have self-esteem concerns.

Umax — iOS app, subscription-based. The marketing site links straight to the App Store without publishing pricing, which is generally a sign the number lives in the in-app purchase flow. Free to install, and the full ratings and "glow-up" features sit behind a subscription.

LooksMax AI — iOS and Android app, subscription-based. Same shape: free download, paid results. The site advertises 2M+ users and doesn't publish a price on the landing page.

Qoves — paid annual membership, no free tier. Genuinely different from the others: a human team reviews 160+ markers across six photos and returns a personalised non-surgical protocol, typically within 28 days. If you want depth and a plan, this is the most rigorous option in the category, and it costs accordingly. Our Qoves comparison goes into what you get for it.

WannaModel — free, web-based, full result. Our own, so treat it accordingly: one photo, 14 scored categories, a percentile, no account and no paywall on the result. The trade-off is honest — we don't offer an improvement plan or human review, so if that's what you want, Qoves does something we don't attempt.

How to tell before you upload

Four checks that take under a minute and save the frustration:

  1. Look for a price on the marketing page. A tool confident about being free says so on the landing page. If pricing isn't mentioned anywhere and the only button is an app-store link, the number is in the purchase flow.
  2. Check the App Store listing for "In-App Purchases." It's listed under the developer name. This tells you there's a paywall before you install anything.
  3. Prefer web over app for a one-off. If you just want a score once, a browser tool has no install, no account, and nothing to cancel later.
  4. Read the trial terms. "Free for 3 days" with card details up front is a subscription with a delay on it. Set a reminder or don't start it.

Free doesn't mean the scoring is worse

Worth separating two things that get conflated: price and rigour.

A paid tool isn't automatically measuring more carefully — you may be paying for a polished app, a coaching layer, or a marketing budget rather than better landmark detection. Equally, a free tool isn't automatically crude; the underlying computer-vision work is fairly commoditised at this point.

The thing actually worth comparing is whether the tool tells you what it's measuring. Almost none of them publish a methodology — what the model was trained on, what the score means, where it's biased. That disclosure is rarer than a free tier, and it's a better signal of whether a number deserves your attention. Ours is on our methodology page; check whether the tool you're using has an equivalent.

What all of them share

Whatever you pay, the same limits apply, and no price tier removes them:

  • A score describes a photograph, not a person. Lighting and camera angle move results more than most people expect — our guides on face symmetry and facial proportions cover the photo setup that gives an accurate read.
  • These models learned from imagery with narrow conventions, so they measure conformance to those conventions rather than beauty in any broader sense.
  • Scores across tools aren't comparable. Different landmark sets, different scales, different reference populations — a 72 on one and an 84 on another isn't a disagreement about your face, it's two different rulers. The PSL scale guide explains why forum numbers and app numbers don't map onto each other either.

One last thing worth saying plainly: if you're comparing tools because the first number upset you, a second opinion from a different algorithm is unlikely to help. The communities built around repeat self-rating have a documented association with appearance-related distress, and no amount of measurement resolves that.

Try the free one

Our free face scan gives you all 14 category scores and your percentile without an account, an app, or a paywall on the result. A few seconds, in your browser.