Get every rating an app has in one call
The App Reputation API enriches a mobile app as clean JSON.
3 active endpoints, on 4, 5 and 10 credit tiers.
- POST/enrich-app/v1/app_reputation
- POST/enrich-app/v1/app_reputation_rich
- POST/enrich-app/v1/batch
What App & SaaS Reputation endpoints does ReefAPI ship?
3 live read endpoints. Read-only data API: no writes, no account actions, no dashboard access on the target site.
App & SaaS Reputation API
2 of 3 endpoints, ready to run
The fused profile: both store listings with full star histograms, the consumer-review score, developer and launch presence, and a single blended index with the numbers it was blended from.
{ "ok": true, "meta": { "api": "enrich-app", "endpoint": "app_reputation", "mode": "basic", "latency_ms": 5027.8, "record_count": 3, "cache_hit": false, "completeness_pct": 75 }, "data": { "provenance": { "reviews_sample": { "status": "skipped", "missing_reason": "skipped" }, "status": { "status": "skipped", "missing_reason": "skipped" }, "news": { "status": "skipped", "missing_reason": "skipped" }, "entity": { "status": "matched", "engine": "app-store/search+google-search", "match": "domain", "match_confidence": 0.85 }, "stores": { "status": "matched", "engine": "app-store" }, "trust": { "status": "matched", "engine": "trustpilot", "coverage_note": "Trustpilot = consumer-review trust signal; TrustRadius = B2B-software reviews. G2/Capterra out of scope. A 'found:false' means no listing at that source." }, "developer": { "status": "not_found", "engine": "github", "coverage_note": "GitHub presence is a positive signal for dev-facing/open-core products; its ABSENCE is not negative for a closed-source consumer app.", "missing_reason": "not_found" }, "launch": { "status": "matched", "engine": "producthunt" } }, "entity": { "query": "notion.so", "input_kind": "domain", "resolved_name": "Notion", "match": "domain", "match_confidence": 0.85, "domain": "notion.so", "store_refs": [ { "store": "apple", "app_id": "1232780281", "country": null }, { "store": "google_play", "app_id": "notion.id", "country": null } ], "developer": "Notion Labs, Incorporated", "evidence": [ { "kind": "domain-input", "domain": "notion.so" }, { "kind": "store-search-match", "name": "Notion: Notes, Tasks, AI", "developer": "Notion Labs, Incorporated", "score": 0.6 } ], "candidates": [ { "name": "Notion: Notes, Tasks, AI", "developer": "Notion Labs, Incorporated", "app_id": "1232780281", "store": "apple", "score": 1, "rating_count": 89886 }, { "name": "Notion: Notes, Tasks, AI", "developer": null, "app_id": "notion.id", "store": "google_play", "score": 1, "rating_count": null }, { "name": "Notion: Music Notation & Tab", "developer": "Fender Musical Instruments Corporation", "app_id": "com.presonus.notionmobile", "store": "google_play", "score": 1, "rating_count": null } ] }, "stores": { "apple": { "app_id": "1232780281", "name": "Notion: Notes, Tasks, AI", "developer": "Notion Labs, Incorporated", "rating": 4.7768, "rating_count": 89879, "review_count": null, "current_version_score": 4.7768, "histogram": { "1": 2337, "2": 874, "3": 1593, "4": 4911, "5": 80172, "total": 89887 }, "installs": null, "price": 0, "free": true, "content_rating": "4+", "categories": [ "Productivity", "Business" ], "version": "1.7.331", "updated": "2026-08-25T18:11:26Z", "url": "https://apps.apple.com/us/app/notion-notes-tasks-ai/id1232780281?uo=4" }, "google_play": { "app_id": "notion.id", "name": "Notion: Notes, Tasks, AI", "developer": "Notion Labs, Inc.", "rating": 4.5780168, "rating_count": 386701, "review_count": 4846, "current_version_score": null, "histogram": { "1": 18861, "2": 7123, "3": 13664, "4": 38932, "5": 308073 }, "installs": "10,000,000+", "price": null, "free": true, "content_rating": "Everyone", "categories": [ "Productivity" ], "version": "0.6.4091", "updated": "Aug 25, 2026", "url": "https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=notion.id&hl=en&gl=us" } }, "trust": { "trustpilot": { "found": true, "name": "Notion", "domain": "notion.so", "business_unit_id": "5d03e8ff7e035900016d8934", "trust_score": 2.3, "stars": 2.5, "reviews_count": 428, "categories": [ "Software Company", "Web Collaboration Platform" ], "match": "domain" } }, "developer": { "github_org": null, "top_repos": [] }, "launch": { "product_hunt": { "name": "Notion", "slug": "notion", "tagline": "The all-in-one workspace", "url": "https://www.producthunt.com/products/notion", "reviews_count": 1392, "rating": null } }, "summary": { "reputation_index": 79.7, "scale": "0-100 (normalized blend of matched 5-/10-star sources)", "signals": [ { "source": "store:apple", "rating": 4.78, "scale": 5, "rating_count": 89879 }, { "source": "store:google_play", "rating": 4.58, "scale": 5, "rating_count": 386701 }, { "source": "trustpilot", "rating": 2.3, "scale": 5, "reviews_count": 428 } ], "sources_matched": [ "entity", "stores", "trust" ], "entity_confidence": 0.85, "note": "reputation_index is a transparent average of the rating sources listed in `signals`, weighted by store popularity; it is null when no rating source matched (not zero)." }, "coverage_note": "Source coverage varies by product type: a consumer (B2C) app is store-rich but often thin on Trustpilot/TrustRadius; a B2B SaaS is the reverse (store-empty, TrustRadius-rich). A null field means 'not found at that source', not zero. G2 and Capterra are intentionally OUT of scope." } }
How the App & SaaS Reputation API works
App & SaaS Reputation is a normal ReefAPI surface — the same four rules that hold for every other engine on the key.
No OAuth app, no request signing, no per-site account. One key covers all 184 engines.
Every route is a POST with a JSON body. Parameters are validated against the published schema before anything is charged.
Credits, not seats. Failed and blocked calls are never charged, and cache hits cost nothing.
One envelope everywhere. meta carries latency_ms, record_count and the endpoint that answered.
Give it a domain, then read provenance before you read the score
This endpoint returns a number, and the number is only worth what the sources behind it are worth. Both of those are in the response, in two blocks you should read before the index.
{"query": "https://apps.apple.com/us/app/.../id1232780281"}A store URL if you have one: it resolved at 0.99 against 0.85 to 0.92 for a domain and 0.55 to 0.6 for a bare name.
One row per source group with matched, not_found or skipped, and a reason when it is missing. not_found means the product is not listed there — it is not an error and it is not a zero.
The individual ratings the blended index was built from, each with its scale and its sample size. If they disagree, the index is hiding that and the signals are not.
One call replaces four lookups and, more usefully, tells you which of the four actually found your product.
curl -X POST https://api.reefapi.com/enrich-app/v1/app_reputation \
-H "x-api-key: $REEF_KEY" \
-H "content-type: application/json" \
-d '{"query":"https://apps.apple.com/us/app/notion/id1232780281","include":["stores"]}'{
"ok": true,
"data": { … },
"meta": {
"api": "enrich-app",
"endpoint": "app_reputation",
"mode": "live",
"latency_ms": …,
"record_count": …
},
"error": null
}Three ways to identify an app, and how well each one resolves
The query parameter accepts three different kinds of input and the accuracy gap between them is large. Each row below is a real call, showing what entity.input_kind and entity.match_confidence came back and what the resolver actually landed on. The pattern is consistent: identifiers resolve exactly, names guess.
| What you send | input_kind and match | What it resolved to |
|---|---|---|
| a store URL or app id | store_url, match 'store-id', confidence 0.99 | The exact app, with the sibling store backfilled by name: Apple id 1232780281 plus Play id notion.id |
| A SaaS domain, e.g. datadoghq.com | domain, match 'domain', confidence 0.92 | The vendor's Play app, but resolved_name came back as 'DASH by Datadog', a different app by the same publisher |
| A bare name, e.g. Signal | name, match 'name-fuzzy', confidence 0.55 | 'Signal Detector Pro' by Lefan Co., a 5,000-install utility. Signal Private Messenger, with 1,077,004 Apple ratings, sat second in entity.candidates |
entity.candidates carries the same-name rivals the resolver considered, with a score for each. On a bare-name query it is the field that saves you: check that candidates[0] is the app you meant, and prefer a store URL or app id whenever the caller can supply one. country defaults to us and selects the store region for both Apple and Play.
Did it resolve the right product, and what is the index made of
Measured on 2026-08-28 against four products across the consumer and B2B ends: a bare name, a brand and a domain. The second row is the finding worth the page.
Five inputs, five confidences: a store URL resolved at 0.99 with match store-id, two domains at 0.92 and 0.85 with match domain, and two bare names at 0.6 and 0.55 with match name-fuzzy. The bare names are where it breaks — one resolved to an unrelated app with a similar name, and another query's candidate list held a musical-instrument manufacturer's product scoring the same 1.0 on name match. Pass a store URL or an app id where you have one.
Four for four, the store ratings and the consumer-review score told opposite stories. Apple and Play returned 4.78 and 4.58, 4.12 and 4.62, 4.73 and 4.54, 4.70 and 4.23 — while the consumer-review score for the same four products was 2.3, 2.1, 1.5 and 1.6. They are not measuring the same thing: one is people who installed an app, the other is people who took the trouble to complain about a company. Do not average them yourself, and do not quote the blended index without the signals array beside it.
summary carries the index, the scale it is on, every rating that went into it with its sample size, the list of sources that matched, and a note saying the index is a popularity-weighted average of exactly those. When nothing matched it is null rather than zero, which is the correct answer to an unanswerable question. Against us: do not display resolved_name next to that number. It was wrong on both of the low-confidence inputs we tried — one returned a conference companion app for a monitoring company's domain. The store block's own name field was right in both cases.
provenance reports each group separately with a reason. GitHub came back not_found for two consumer products and matched for two developer-facing ones, and the response says in as many words that absence of a code repository is not a negative signal for a closed-source app. Coverage genuinely varies by product type: a consumer app is store-rich and thin elsewhere, a B2B tool is the reverse.
On the consumer products we measured, both store blocks carried app id, name, developer, rating, rating count, a full five-bucket histogram, categories, version and a last-updated date. But you do not always get both: a developer-tooling domain returned a Play block and no Apple block at all. Against us: one store returns the last-updated date as an ISO timestamp and the other as a plain English date string, and install counts and review counts are present on one and null on the other. Check for the block before you read it, and normalise the two before you compare them.
The standard call took 2.8 to 4.1 seconds across four products. The rich variant on the same product took 30.9 seconds and what it added was five review samples whose title and date fields were null on all five, plus an empty status block and a news list. Use the standard call in anything user-facing.
What people build with App & SaaS Reputation
The jobs this data is most often used for.
endpoints
credits per call
Fraud tools call app_reputation to score an app before trusting it.
App-intelligence products resolve an app name to its store listings and developer.
Due-diligence workflows use batch to vet a portfolio of apps.
What App & SaaS Reputation data costs
The cheapest call here is 4 credits, so $15/mo (Pro) buys 2,500 of them — $1.50 per 1,000 credits. Credits roll over and never expire, and failed or blocked calls are not charged.
Full pricing →- 1,000 free credits on signup, no card
- One key, all 184 APIs, one credit pool
- Failed and blocked calls are never charged
- Credits roll over and never expire
Call it in two lines
Sign up, get 1,000 credits and one key that works on every engine. Then this is the whole protocol.
curl -X POST https://api.reefapi.com/enrich-app/v1/app_reputation \
-H "x-api-key: $REEF_KEY" \
-H "content-type: application/json" \
-d '{"query":"https://apps.apple.com/us/app/notion/id1232780281","include":["stores"]}'import requests
r = requests.post(
"https://api.reefapi.com/enrich-app/v1/app_reputation",
headers={"x-api-key": REEF_KEY},
json={
"query": "https://apps.apple.com/us/app/notion/id1232780281",
"include": [
"stores"
]
},
)
print(r.json()["data"])Have a question? We got answers.
The questions people actually ask before wiring up App & SaaS Reputation.
Get a free key →Why did a bare app name resolve to the wrong app?▾
Because name matching is fuzzy and the response says so with a low confidence rather than an error. A measured query of 'Signal' returned resolved_name 'Signal Detector Pro' at match_confidence 0.55, while 'Signal - Private Messenger' with over a million Apple ratings appeared as the second candidate. Anything at or near 0.55 should be treated as a guess. Pass a store URL, an app id or a domain, or read entity.candidates and re-query with the id you wanted.
resolved_name and the store block disagree. Which one describes the ratings?▾
The store block does. On a measured domain query for datadoghq.com, entity.resolved_name came back as 'DASH by Datadog' because that title scored highest in search, while entity.store_refs and the stores block both resolved to com.datadog.app, the main Datadog app, whose rating of 3.17 across 442 ratings is what the response actually reports. When you display a name next to a rating, take it from stores.apple.name or stores.google_play.name, not from resolved_name.
The store rating is 4.6 and Trustpilot is 2.3. Is one of them wrong?▾
Neither. They measure different populations, and the gap is normal enough that the engine reports both instead of averaging them away. A measured Notion lookup returned Apple 4.78 from 89,874 ratings, Play 4.58 from 386,180 ratings, and Trustpilot 2.3 from 428 reviews. Store ratings are dominated by satisfied everyday users, while a public review site collects complaints. summary.signals lists each source with its rating, scale and count so you can weight them yourself.
What is reputation_index and when is it null?▾
It is a 0-100 blend of exactly the sources listed in summary.signals, weighted by store popularity, and the payload documents that null means no rating source matched rather than a score of zero. Measured values: 79.7 for Notion across three sources, 49.7 for Datadog across two. Because the blend depends on which groups you ran, the same app scores differently under different include sets, so store the signals array alongside the index if you plan to compare over time.
Why is one of the two stores missing entirely?▾
Because coverage depends on what kind of product it is, and the response carries a coverage_note saying so. A consumer app is store-rich and often thin on review sites, while a B2B SaaS product is the reverse. A measured lookup on datadoghq.com returned a Google Play block and no Apple block at all, plus a Trustpilot match. G2 and Capterra are explicitly out of scope, so their absence is a stated limit and not a failed lookup.
Why do rating_count and review_count differ so much on Google Play?▾
They count different things. A measured Notion record returned rating_count 386,180 against review_count 4,845 on Play: the first is people who tapped a star, the second is people who wrote text. Apple returns rating_count 89,874 with review_count null, so do not expect the pair to be symmetrical across stores. installs is a bucketed string such as '10,000,000+' rather than a number, and Apple has no equivalent field.
Which groups can I ask for on the basic action?▾
stores, trust, developer and launch. reviews_sample, status and news are rich-only, and asking for one from app_reputation returns ok:false with INVALID_PARAM and the message 'include/exclude left no field groups to run'. Groups you did not ask for show up in provenance with status 'skipped'. A group that ran and found nothing looks different: a measured developer lookup returned status 'not_found' with a note that a missing GitHub presence is not a negative signal for a closed-source app.
How is this different from enrich-company on the same brand?▾
This engine is anchored on the product and its ratings: app store entries, review scores, launch presence and a reputation index. enrich-company is anchored on the domain and returns firmographics, WHOIS and DNS, hiring and tech stack, with no store data beyond a name-level apps group. They overlap on one field, the Trustpilot match, which both retrieve by domain. If your question is 'how do users rate this product', use this engine; if it is 'what is this company', use enrich-company.
What is the App & SaaS Reputation API?▾
App & SaaS Reputation API is a ReefAPI endpoint group for app & saas reputation It returns live JSON through POST requests under /enrich-app/v1.
Is the App & SaaS Reputation API free to try?▾
Yes. ReefAPI starts with 1,000 free credits, no card required. App & SaaS Reputation calls use the same shared credit balance as every other ReefAPI engine.
Do I need an App & SaaS Reputation login or account?▾
No login to App & SaaS Reputation is needed for the API response. You call ReefAPI with your x-api-key header, and the playground can run live examples before you create a production key.
How fresh is the App & SaaS Reputation data?▾
The page example is captured from a live app_reputation call, and production requests fetch live data through ReefAPI rather than a static sample.
How many credits does the App & SaaS Reputation API use?▾
App & SaaS Reputation actions currently cost 4-10 credits per successful call. Failed or blocked calls are free, and all APIs draw from one credit pool.
Can I call App & SaaS Reputation from an AI assistant or MCP client?▾
Yes. Connect ReefAPI once through MCP and your assistant can call enrich-app actions with the same key, credit pool and JSON envelope used by normal REST requests.
14 Reputation & Reviews APIs on the same key
One key, one credit pool, one response envelope. If you are pulling App & SaaS Reputation, you are one call away from the rest of the category — no second contract, no second integration.
Need something this API does not do?
Name the endpoint, the field, or a source we do not carry yet. We ship new APIs every week and you would be first to get the key. Real people read every message and reply the same day.
Try it on your own data before you pay anything
The call above is the real endpoint, not a recording. A free key gives you 1,000 credits, the other 183 APIs, and the same envelope everywhere.
Endpoints, parameters and credit costs on this page are read from the live catalog and cannot drift from what the API accepts. Field notes were captured on 2026-08-28.