Generated from ChatWith.io's audit data
ChatWith.io scores 41/100 across 6 category checks, which indicates listing-quality gaps across 3 of 6 audited categories. Strengths: title optimization (63/100) is the strongest category — installing for evaluation is fine, long-term confidence needs the gaps below addressed. Watch-items: languages (0/100) and categories & discoverability (33/100) drag the average down; lifting languages is the single largest available lever. Per-category breakdown below.
This is an independent listing audit for ChatWith.io on Zoom. It scored 41/100 (grade D) on today's snapshot. Top strength: Title Optimization at 63/100. Biggest gap: Languages at 0/100. We re-audit every 24 hours from the canonical Zoom listing.
Six weighted areas, pass / warning / fail per check, tiers at 85 / 65. Full methodology · Glossary
Last updated: July 12, 2026
ChatWith.io's overall score of 41/100 is a result that signals significant listing weaknesses across multiple categories, computed as the weighted average of 6 category checks. The spread is highly polarized across categories — 3 categories score above the headline number and 3 score below. The strongest category is Title Optimization (63/100, +22 vs overall); the weakest is Languages (0/100), a 41-point gap below the headline score — the largest single lever. Top three by score: Title Optimization (63), Visual Assets (50), Technical & Support (42).
Scoring criteria, category weightings, and the full rubric (identical across every Zoom App Marketplace listing AppRanks audits) are documented on the methodology page and the audit-score glossary entry. Disputes or data corrections: [email protected].
ChatWith.io scored 41/100 in the AppRanks listing audit — a result that signals significant listing weaknesses. The score is the weighted average of 6 category checks: Title Optimization 63/100, Description & Content 40/100, Visual Assets 50/100, Categories & Discoverability 33/100, Technical & Support 42/100, Languages 0/100. Each category is scored against a fixed rubric that is identical for every app on the platform, so scores are directly comparable across Zoom listings.
ChatWith.io's strongest audit area is Title Optimization, scored at 63/100. Of the 4 checks AppRanks runs in this category, 1 pass cleanly, with the remainder in warning rather than failing state. This is the dimension a competing listing would need to match before ChatWith.io loses its current edge in this category.
The weakest area in ChatWith.io's audit is Languages, scored at 0/100. The failing checks are language count, each with a concrete fix described below. Tightening this category is the highest-impact change available to the listing — its weight in the overall score makes it the lever most likely to move the headline number on the next refresh.