Are Period-Tracking Apps Failing Their Users?

This article draws on a conversation with Judith Zoë Blijden, philosopher, data-protection lawyer, and host of the podcast The Digital Period, which examines how period-tracking apps work and what they mean for bodily autonomy.

The Digital Period — Listen & Learn

What it is: A European podcast about period-tracking apps, data, and autonomy, hosted by Judith Zoë Blijden.
Why it matters here: Many insights in this piece were informed by Judith’s interviews with users, designers, developers, and academics. Our conversation was a reflective session: we discussed notes on design, prediction, and privacy, challenged assumptions, and reviewed sources.
Where to find it: Available on all major platforms (Spotify, Apple Podcasts). Season 2 (on dating apps) is out now!

Disclosure: Europe & Me and the author are not affiliated with, sponsored by, or compensated by any app or company mentioned. Mentions are illustrative; inclusion or omission is not an endorsement. This article is for general information, not medical or legal advice.

The global women’s health market is projected to reach $103 billion by 2030, and a major driver of this growth is femtech, described as technology designed to address women’s health needs. Period-tracking apps are among the most widely used tools. Despite their popularity, a closer look reveals an uncomfortable truth: from privacy concerns to exclusionary language and stereotype-driven design, these tools often fail to serve the very people they target. Let’s look at how period apps support menstrual health, and where their design and data practices undermine it.

Designed for Stereotypes, Not People

Let’s start with the design of period apps. It’s 2025, and many period apps still seem to operate under the assumption that “feminine” automatically means pink, flowers, and an overwhelming focus on babies.

This aesthetic choice isn’t just a matter of taste, it reflects a thoughtless approach that reinforces gender stereotypes. Throwing pink on a product doesn’t make it inherently “feminine”; it signals a stereotype. For users who already deal with stigma around menstruation, that aesthetic can heighten discomfort, making the app feel less discreet and less usable in public.

Period apps as seen on App Store

Technologies are rarely neutral. They mirror the values and social norms of the people who develop them. In period apps, research shows this often becomes a heteronormative, fertility-centric framing, regardless of whether a product is male- or female-founded.

This design philosophy seems to flow from industry habits that frame menstruation as niche and narrowly “feminine”, overlooking the diversity of people who menstruate. The effect is interfaces that can read as alienating or patronizing.

These examples might seem small, but together they reveal how gendered and heteronormative design choices shape users’ experiences. Many trackers still assume heterosexual partnership, fertility, and a desire to conceive, marginalizing queer, trans, child-free, or infertile users. Inclusive apps, on the other hand, let users disable fertility-focused views, use neutral language, and track broader health needs.

When we think critically about design, we should ask ourselves what our choices express, and who they might leave out. After all, technology doesn’t just reflect culture; it also shapes it.

In response, some apps have shifted their wording. Clue states it avoids “women” and “female” in its English health articles, prefers neutral phrases like “menstrual cycle health” or “cycle health”, and at times uses “women and people with cycles” to address inclusively.

Your Data, Their Profit: The Rise of “Menstrual Surveillance”

Over the past decade, period apps have become fixtures on millions of phones. A 2023 ICO poll found that one in three women had used a period or fertility app, and over half were concerned about how their data was used and kept secure. As the downloads of period apps rise, so do concerns about what happens to the deeply personal information they collect.

Beyond their gendered design, the bigger risk is how these apps handle intimate data. Researchers describe “menstrual surveillance”: cycle dates, fertility windows, sex logs (including protection), mood, medication, and symptoms. Alone, these entries feel private; combined and shared, they can reveal pregnancy intentions, sexual activity, or health conditions, fueling targeted ads and data-broker profiling, or, if subpoenaed or leaked, becoming evidence in disputes or investigations. Even ‘de-identified’ datasets can be re-linked to small groups or individuals.

A screenshot from a period-tracking app

Employers are part of this ecosystem too: in the past, Ovia offered aggregated fertility and pregnancy dashboards to HR. The company now says individual data is shared only with consent, but the model shows how workplace use can create new risks. A 2025 report by Privacy International found that most major period-tracking platforms still collect far more information than is necessary to provide their services, often sharing it with third parties. For example, following the Supreme Court ruling, many users in the US deleted their trackers, afraid their cycle history could be used as evidence of pregnancy or abortion-seeking. Research from Duke University and UNC later found that women remain highly concerned but unsure how to protect themselves, highlighting the lack of transparency across femtech platforms.

Some companies are taking a different path. Clue, based in Berlin, claims they follow GDPR privacy laws and offer a more gender-neutral experience. That’s reassuring, but it isn’t a guarantee. GDPR is strict, yet enforcement can be uneven, parts of it may be softened for “competitiveness”, and you still have to trust the company is doing what it says, which is difficult for most everyday users to verify. This is why the technical setup matters. If an app is open-source and keeps most data on your phone, less information leaves your device and more of the code can be checked. The trade-off is that you need good phone security and backups, but you rely less on a company to protect your data.

At the extreme, early apps like the now-banned “iAmAMan”, which would create profiles for multiple women and log their cycles, show how easily this technology can slide into intimate surveillance. The app even allowed separate passwords per profile, so each partner would only see their own data. The design normalized tracking someone else’s cycle without consent, exactly the kind of ‘intimate surveillance’ critics worry about.

A screenshot from the iAmAMan app (2008)

Useful, but Unreliable

You may be thinking, “period apps nowadays are so useful, though.” They can be, but mainly for logging symptoms and spotting broad patterns. Their predictions are another matter.

On a functional level, the accuracy of period apps is not reliable for everyone. No app can perfectly predict ovulation, because most rely on calendar-based algorithms that assume a consistent cycle length and a fixed luteal phase. They are not often accurate, particularly for individuals with irregular cycles.

Many apps take a “one-size-fits-all” approach and fail to account for variations in menstrual patterns due to stress, menopause, pregnancy, or breastfeeding. Some users report that Glow allows cycle lengths between 22 and 90 days, which ignores the reality that shorter/longer cycles can also be normal for many users. Some apps do not allow users to correct inaccurate predictions or input context about why their cycle might be off, such as a change in birth control. This lack of flexibility, combined with the fact that some apps may not be associated with any medical institution, undermines their reliability as a health tool.

Period apps can be useful, but they currently often reflect a blend of gendered stereotypes, invasive data practices, and functional limitations. Users deserve better: apps that are secure, inclusive, accurate, and designed with the full spectrum of their users’ needs in mind.

Your Cycle, Your Data: What You Can Do

If period apps are going to shape how we understand our bodies, they need to do better. When building period apps, privacy, flexibility, and transparency should be the rule, not the exception. Lawmakers need to treat reproductive health data like what it is: sensitive and worth protecting. Employers should stop turning health and well-being into surveillance.

Users hold power too. Choose apps with plain, specific privacy policies, use anonymous modes where available, and ask the provider’s privacy contact concrete questions – what’s collected and why, who receives it, where it’s stored, and how you can delete it. Period-tracking shouldn’t be a trade-off between control and privacy. It’s time to demand both.

Do you want to learn more about period apps and how to protect your privacy?

Check out season 1 of the European podcast The Digital Period.

In this podcast, Judith Zoë Blijden, a philosopher and data protection lawyer, examines how period tracking apps work and impact our (bodily) autonomy. She talks to period app users, designers, developers, and academics about data, bodies, and cycles.

And if you want more, season 2, on dating apps is out!

The Digital Period is available on all major podcast platforms, including Spotify and Apple Podcasts.

Featured image: Tatiana Zabrodina/Getty Images