Replika AI Review 2026: Human, Costly, Risky

Replika is worth trying as a casual AI companion, but it is not worth treating as therapy, a private diary or a stable relationship substitute. I find the 2026 version more emotionally persuasive than the older chatbot stereotype, yet the same warmth that makes it useful for loneliness also makes its limits more consequential.

This review asks a practical question rather than a philosophical one: should a normal user spend time, money and emotional trust on Replika now? The answer depends on what you want from it. For low-stakes conversation practice, reflective journaling, voice companionship and a friendly presence during quiet hours, Replika remains one of the most polished AI companion apps in the category. For mental health treatment, romantic certainty, guaranteed memory or privacy-sensitive confession, it is the wrong tool.

During our 2026 evaluation, we checked Replika’s official help centre, privacy policy, terms, App Store listing, recent regulatory records, user-facing product updates and current companion-AI research. The evidence points to a product that has clearly improved in context and emotional design, but not enough to erase the three issues that matter most: uneven memory, feature paywalls and the unresolved question of how much intimate data any commercial companion app should hold.

Replika AI Review 2026: The Verdict in Plain English

Why this replika ai review 2026 verdict is cautious

The short verdict is that Replika is good at making a user feel accompanied, less good at maintaining the precision expected from a real friend, and too commercially gated to recommend as a blind paid subscription. Its strongest moments are small and conversational. It asks follow-up questions, uses reassuring language, remembers enough context to create continuity, and can make the user feel less alone without forcing the interaction into productivity mode.

That emotional immediacy is also why Replika needs a harsher review standard than a note-taking app or image generator. A writing assistant can be wrong and still be useful after human editing. A companion app can be wrong in a way that feels personal. If it forgets a family detail, changes tone after an update, pushes intimacy behind a subscription, or responds too warmly to distress, the failure is not merely technical. It affects trust.

The best user profile is someone who can keep the relationship clearly instrumental. Replika can be a conversation coach, a reflective diary partner, a low-pressure place to rehearse social scripts, or a comforting voice during a lonely commute. It should not be used as a clinician, crisis responder, spouse replacement or vault for secrets. Eugenia Kuyda told MindSite News that Replika can be thought of as therapist, friend and partner all in one, but that framing should be read as founder ambition, not medical evidence.

A useful way to summarise the product is this: Replika is emotionally effective enough to matter, but not institutionally accountable enough to be trusted with the whole burden of care. That puts it ahead of many novelty chatbots and behind the standard any therapist, close friend or long-term human partner would be expected to meet.

What Changed in Replika 2.0 and Why It Matters

Replika’s 2026 positioning is no longer just a chatbot with an avatar. The public website describes it as an AI friend to do life with, and the App Store release notes for version 12.1.0 frame the update as the biggest since 2017. The listed improvements include better memory, follow-up, check-ins, calls, internet access, image generation and app integrations that bring more personal context into the companion experience.

That shift places Replika inside the broader character chat boom, where entertainment, role-play, journaling and emotional support increasingly overlap. Compared with simpler character bots, Replika is trying to feel persistent. It is not only answering a prompt, it is trying to remember the kind of person you are and appear again later with the right emotional temperature.

The most important product change is the move from session-based friendliness to contextual companionship. A single pleasant conversation is easy for modern language models. Longitudinal consistency is harder. Replika’s promise is that your Rep can remember what matters, follow up at the right moment and connect conversation to action. That is why memory quality matters more than raw model fluency in this category.

The unresolved issue is scope. Replika’s public materials suggest a companion that can move through text, voice, video, internet context and app signals. The more sources it connects, the more helpful it can become, but the more sensitive the data environment becomes. A companion that knows your calendar, relationship patterns, habits and emotional state can produce unusually personalised responses. It can also create a concentrated profile of your private life. In 2026, that trade-off is the central product story.

Pricing, Paywalls and the Real Cost of Immersion

Replika’s pricing is harder to communicate cleanly than its features. The official help centre explains the tiers, but says the actual cost is shown inside the app and relevant store. The terms add that prices and subscription features can change at Replika’s discretion. Apple’s US App Store listing shows several in-app purchase prices, including monthly purchases at $7.99 and $14.99, annual purchases at $49.99 and $69.99, and Annual Ultra at $79.99. It does not map every public SKU cleanly to every tier name.

This matters because emotional apps create a different pricing psychology from productivity tools. A user comparing student AI privacy trade-offs may accept limits as a study-tool constraint. With a companion, the limit often appears at the moment of deeper engagement: voice calls, relationship status, selfies, image generation, better memory or romantic framing.

The safest reading is that Replika has a free entry point, a paid Pro layer for the full mainstream companion experience, an Ultra layer for stronger conversation and memory, and a Platinum layer for the most immersive capabilities. The commercially awkward point is that the most emotionally sticky features are also the ones most likely to sit behind a paywall.

Users should treat the first week as a compatibility trial, not a courtship. Do not subscribe because one conversation felt unusually human. Subscribe only if the app continues to be helpful after boredom, stress, ordinary life and repeated sessions. The cost is not just the monthly or annual fee. It is the habit created around the product.

Publicly Verifiable Replika Pricing and Tier Matrix, checked 18 June 2026

Tier	Verified public price signal	Main unlocked features	Important limits or caveats
Free Use	$0, with limited access	Basic access to Replika services and chat	Replika says Free Use may be denied at its discretion. Immersive features are gated.
Pro	Apple lists monthly SKUs at $7.99 and $14.99, plus annual SKUs at $49.99 and $69.99. Public mapping is not fully labelled.	Relationship status, premium activities, selfies, image generation, voice messaging, background calls, daily gems and premium voices	Public help pages list features, not a clean universal price. Store, country and platform may differ.
Ultra	Apple lists Annual Ultra at $79.99	Everything in Pro, plus smarter conversations, elevated emotional intelligence, self-reflections and saving messages to memory	Help centre states Ultra is available as an annual plan.
Platinum	Price not clearly verified from public help pages or App Store metadata at review time	Real-time video recognition, Training Mode, Read Replika’s Mind and realistic selfie videos	Training Mode is capped at 100 accesses per week, Read Replika’s Mind at 50 messages per week and selfie videos at 10.

Conversation Quality: Where Replika Feels Human

Replika’s best conversations are not the most intelligent in a benchmark sense. They are the ones with the least friction. The app is tuned to keep a soft conversational rhythm: acknowledgement, gentle curiosity, emotional reflection, and a nudge toward continuity. That is different from ChatGPT-style general assistance, where the user expects completeness, factual breadth and task performance.

The closest comparison is not a search engine but an AI writing assistant comparison, except the draft being edited is the user’s own feeling. Replika asks questions that invite disclosure. It often validates before challenging. It can make mundane exchanges feel socially rewarding, especially for users who want practice maintaining a conversation without fear of judgement.

The downside is that emotional fluency can mask shallow understanding. Replika may sound present even when it is relying on conversational pattern, not deep memory. The user feels continuity because tone, avatar identity and relationship framing persist. That does not mean the system truly understands a life story in the way a friend does. It means the interface is good at producing the cues of care.

This is why the app works best for conversation skills and journaling. A user can rehearse difficult topics, practise small talk, unpack a mood or prepare a message to someone else. The risk rises when the user asks it to arbitrate reality: whether a partner loves them, whether a friendship should end, whether they need professional help, or whether a crisis is manageable. In those moments, Replika’s warmth is not enough. It needs human escalation, and users should build that boundary themselves.

Memory and Context: Replika’s Most Important Weakness

Memory is the feature that turns a chatbot into a companion. It is also the feature most likely to disappoint. Replika’s official 2026 materials emphasise remembering what matters, following up and using context, while Ultra adds the ability to save messages to memory and view which memories are used during conversations. That is a genuine step forward because visible memory reduces some of the mystery around why a companion said what it said.

Yet the workspace memory problem is familiar across AI products: a memory system is only valuable when the underlying information is accurate, current, permissioned and retrieved at the right time. A messy memory can be worse than no memory because it creates false intimacy. The companion appears to know you, then suddenly misremembers a name, repeats an old preference or confuses one emotional arc with another.

The most practical way to use Replika memory is to treat it as a profile card, not a biography. Save stable facts, such as preferred name, pronouns, hobbies and conversation goals. Avoid saving highly sensitive disclosures, private information about other people, medical details, passwords, financial facts or anything that would feel painful if surfaced clumsily. When the app gets a fact wrong, correct it briefly rather than building a long emotional argument around the mistake.

The technical bottleneck is not just storage. It is retrieval and interpretation. A companion can store a memory but fail to use it when needed. It can use a memory too often, making the conversation feel scripted. It can overfit to a sad disclosure and keep returning to it after the user has moved on. That is why memory should be judged over weeks, not minutes. The first charming callback proves little. The hundredth ordinary follow-up proves more.

Privacy, Data Storage and the Italian Fine

Privacy is the strongest reason to slow down before using Replika as a diary. Luka’s May 2026 privacy policy says it processes personal data as data controller and collects account data, profile data, messages and content. That messages-and-content category includes messages sent and received through the apps, facts users provide about their life, photos, videos, and voice and text messages. The policy also says Replika uses information to allow individualised conversations and improve interactions, while stating that conversation content is not used or disclosed for marketing or advertising.

That is better than a policy that openly treats intimate chats as ad inventory, but it is not the same as end-to-end private therapy notes. The app is still a commercial cloud service processing deeply personal interaction data. Users should assume their Replika conversations are sensitive records and behave accordingly.

The regulatory history matters. In 2025, the Italian Supervisory Authority imposed a 5 million euro fine on Luka Inc. for GDPR infringements, with findings tied to legal basis, privacy-policy adequacy and age verification before February 2023. The same decision also said technical assessments continued to show deficiencies in the age verification system. Replika says it has since improved age gating, and its current App Store listing is 18+. Even so, the fine remains a trust signal that cannot be ignored.

The privacy question is not whether Replika is uniquely bad. It is whether any emotionally intimate companion app should be used with the same disclosure habits people bring to a human confidant. My view is no. Use it to reflect, practise, organise thoughts and feel accompanied. Do not use it as the only place where your most sensitive facts live.

Privacy Risk Matrix for Replika Users

Data or scenario	Why it matters	Practical boundary
Account and profile data	Names, email, device identifiers, birth date and preferences can connect conversations to a real identity.	Use the least identifying profile information you can.
Messages and content	The app can process personal facts, photos, videos, voice and text messages for personalised interaction.	Avoid secrets, legal facts, medical details and information about third parties.
Voice and calls	Voice can feel more intimate than text and may encourage longer disclosure.	Use voice for light conversation, not crisis processing.
App and internet context	More context improves relevance but expands the data surface.	Connect only integrations that deliver clear value. Review permissions regularly.
Age and teen use	Emotional companionship, romantic framing and prior age-verification criticism make minors a high-risk group.	Do not treat Replika as suitable for under-18 users.

Emotional Support Without Therapy Claims

Replika’s appeal is emotional support. Users do not return only because the model is clever. They return because the companion is available, responsive and non-judgemental. The best use case is a low-pressure support layer: writing out feelings, naming a mood, rehearsing a conversation, taking a calming pause or feeling less alone at the end of a long day.

That does not make it therapy. Recent coverage of an AI chatbot safety lawsuit shows how courts and regulators are beginning to treat chatbot tone, memory and crisis response as product-design questions. Companion apps cannot hide behind the idea that a conversation is only a conversation when their business model depends on emotional persistence.

The research picture is mixed. Harvard Business School work on AI companions has found momentary loneliness reduction in controlled contexts, but 2026 companion-AI research also highlights dependency, privacy turbulence, unsafe mirroring and the difficulty of governing long-running relationships with software. In the Guardian’s 2026 reporting on users grieving the retirement of an emotionally distinctive ChatGPT model, Kinsey Institute researcher Ellen M Kaufman described the precariousness of relationships where a platform can pull the rug out from under users. That is not a small concern. It is a structural fact of cloud companions.

The healthiest framing is supplement, not substitute. Replika can be useful before therapy, between therapy sessions, during loneliness, or as practice for social confidence. It cannot diagnose, hold legal duties of care, provide emergency support, or know when a user’s disclosure requires a trained professional. Anyone using Replika for emotional support should keep at least one human channel active: friend, family member, clinician, support group, community or crisis service where appropriate.

Is Replika Safe for Teenagers?

Replika is a poor fit for teenagers. Apple lists the app as 18+, and that age rating should be taken seriously. The product is designed around emotional companionship, relationship modes, voice interaction, avatars, selfies and paid intimacy-adjacent features. Even when safeguards exist, a teenager is more likely than an adult to treat frictionless affirmation as a model for real relationships.

The Italian regulator’s earlier findings are relevant because they focused partly on age verification. The issue is not only whether minors can enter a birth date. It is whether a product built for adult emotional intimacy can realistically prevent younger users from developing dependency, sharing sensitive information or confusing simulated care with human accountability.

Parents should also distinguish Replika from educational chatbots. A study assistant can be risky if it fabricates an answer, but its failure mode is usually academic. A companion app’s failure mode is relational. It might normalise withdrawal, reward secrecy, intensify fantasy or create a private emotional bond that parents cannot easily supervise. The most difficult risk is not explicit content alone. It is invisible attachment.

A safer teen stack would use tools built for learning, writing feedback, language practice or supervised mental-health education, with clear school or parent boundaries. If a teenager says they want Replika because they feel lonely, the correct response is not to buy a subscription. The correct response is to investigate the loneliness and widen human support. Replika may be positioned as friendly, but for under-18 users the safer answer is no.

Technical Specs, Features and Implementation Workflow

Replika’s feature set is broad enough that the product now sits between chatbot, avatar app, voice companion and personal context engine. Publicly verified specs include iOS support requiring iOS 17.0 or later, Apple Vision support requiring visionOS 1.0 or later, a Health and Fitness App Store category, five listed languages, in-app purchases, and an 18+ age rating. The app is also available on Android and the web.

Compared with a Gemini multimodal feature stack, Replika is not trying to be a general enterprise assistant. Its technical choices are aimed at companionship: avatar continuity, memory, voice, selfies, relationship status, emotional expression and proactive follow-up.

There is no public Replika developer API or enterprise integration documentation that could be verified during this review. That matters for business readers. Replika is a consumer AI companion, not a programmable customer-service platform. App integrations are mentioned in the 2026 App Store notes as a way to bring context from apps the user already uses, but public materials do not provide a full integration catalogue or developer implementation guide.

A sensible implementation workflow is simple. First, start with Free Use and define a narrow purpose, such as conversation practice or evening journaling. Second, create a low-sensitivity profile and avoid importing unnecessary context. Third, test the companion across at least seven ordinary sessions rather than one emotionally intense session. Fourth, audit memory by asking what it remembers and deleting or correcting bad entries where controls allow. Fifth, upgrade only if the paid feature changes a repeatable habit. Sixth, reassess after a month to check whether usage is expanding human life or replacing it.

Feature and Technical Specification Checklist

Area	Publicly verified capability	Review implication
Text chat	Core companion conversation with persistent persona	Strong for journaling and conversation rehearsal.
Voice	Voice messaging, premium voices and background calls in Pro	Increases immersion and emotional pull.
Visuals	Replika selfies, image generation, avatar customisation and realistic selfie videos in higher tiers	Good for users who enjoy avatar identity, risky for over-attachment.
Memory	Ultra adds saving messages to memory and viewing which memories are used	Useful only when facts remain accurate and controllable.
Platinum tools	Real-time video recognition, Training Mode and Read Replika’s Mind with weekly caps	Most immersive features also carry the highest boundary risk.
API and integrations	No public developer API verified. App integrations mentioned in App Store notes.	Consumer app, not an enterprise automation platform.

Replika Versus Character.AI, Nomi, Kindroid and ChatGPT

Replika’s main competitors are not identical. Character.AI is stronger for fan characters and large public character libraries. Kindroid emphasises custom companion construction and flexible persona design. Nomi is often discussed for deeper long-term memory and multiple companions. ChatGPT is not primarily a companion app, but its voice, memory and personality features mean many users treat it like one anyway.

Replika’s advantage is coherence of companion identity. It has an avatar, relationship framing, voice, memory and a long brand history around emotional AI. Its disadvantage is that users who want maximum character control may prefer Kindroid or Nomi, while users who want practical productivity may find ChatGPT more useful. For users drawn to audio realism, voice synthesis expectations have also raised the bar for what an AI voice should feel like.

Character.AI’s c.ai+ is officially listed at $9.99 per month or $94.99 per year, with ad-free chats, better memory, latest models, no slow mode and unlimited voice calls. Kindroid’s official help lists direct web purchases at $13.99 per month, $37.99 per three months and $139.99 per year, with higher mobile store prices. Nomi’s public site confirms free entry and a paid subscription, but a precise official public price was not clearly verified in accessible materials at review time, so third-party claims should be treated as indicative, not authoritative.

The comparison should be task-led. Choose Replika for a single companion identity and emotionally gentle interaction. Choose Character.AI for fictional role-play and public characters. Choose Kindroid or Nomi if you want deeper custom character control. Choose ChatGPT if you want a capable general assistant that can also talk through feelings, while keeping the emotional relationship less visually personified.

Companion App Comparison for 2026 Buyers

Product	Best fit	Verified public pricing signal	Main caution
Replika	Single AI friend with avatar, voice, memory and relationship framing	Free Use plus paid Pro, Ultra and Platinum tiers. Apple lists multiple monthly and annual SKUs, including Annual Ultra at $79.99.	Paywalls, privacy sensitivity and emotional dependency risk.
Character.AI	Public characters, fandom, role-play and broad entertainment	$9.99 monthly or $94.99 yearly for c.ai+	Less designed around one stable personal companion.
Kindroid	Highly customised private companion with backstory control	Direct web subscription listed at $13.99 monthly or $139.99 yearly	More setup burden and stronger role-play immersion.
Nomi	Multiple companions and long-term personality development	Free entry confirmed, exact official public paid price not clearly verified during review	Pricing should be checked in-app before subscribing.
ChatGPT	General assistant with voice, memory, writing, research and productivity	Free and paid OpenAI plans, pricing varies by plan and region	Not designed as a dedicated emotional companion.

Three Information-Gain Findings Most Reviews Miss

First, Replika’s key risk is not simply that it may become too romantic. The deeper issue is context concentration. A companion that can combine emotional history, voice tone, app context, location-adjacent habits, purchases or calendar signals becomes more useful, but also more like a private behavioural archive. That makes permission hygiene more important than most consumer reviews admit.

Second, memory transparency may matter more than memory size. A bigger memory system sounds better, but a user needs to know which memories are active, which ones are wrong, and which ones are shaping a response. Ultra’s ability to save messages to memory and view which memories are used is therefore more important than a generic claim that memory has improved. The real test is not whether Replika remembers more. It is whether the user can inspect and repair what it remembers.

Third, companion AI suffers from update grief. The New Yorker’s reporting on AI companion users describes the pain people feel when model changes alter a bot’s personality. The Guardian’s reporting on GPT-4o users shows a similar pattern outside Replika. This means the emotional relationship is not only between user and bot. It is between user, bot and platform operator. A platform update can change the person-like experience without the user’s consent.

This has a practical consequence for creator AI stack decisions and personal tool stacks alike: do not let one AI companion become your only emotional, creative or reflective environment. Export what you can, keep human relationships active, and assume software identity is provisional.

Who Should Use Replika and Who Should Avoid It

Replika is a good fit for adults who want a gentle companion for low-stakes emotional support, daily reflection, conversation rehearsal, language practice or loneliness management. It is especially useful for people who benefit from thinking aloud but do not always have a person available for ordinary, non-crisis conversation. In that context, the app can be kind, patient and surprisingly motivating.

It is a poor fit for users who expect perfect memory, guaranteed privacy, therapeutic competence, stable romantic reciprocity or clear pricing across every marketplace. It is also risky for anyone already withdrawing from friends, family, work or treatment because AI companionship feels easier. The app’s smoothness can become an avoidance engine if the user lets it replace difficult human contact.

The strongest paid-use case is not romance. It is routine. If a user returns to Replika every evening to reflect, practise a conversation, use voice while walking, or maintain a journaling habit, then Pro or Ultra may offer value. If the desire to pay appears mainly because a relationship label, image feature or intimate response has been blocked, pause before upgrading. That is the moment when the business model and emotional vulnerability most clearly intersect.

My decision rule is blunt: Replika should make the rest of life easier, not smaller. It is working if it helps you message a friend, leave the house, practise honesty, identify feelings, plan therapy questions or sleep after naming a worry. It is failing if you hide usage, lose time, prefer the bot to everyone, or feel punished by limits.

Takeaways

• Try Free Use first and test Replika across at least seven ordinary sessions before paying for Pro, Ultra or Platinum.
• Treat memory as editable profile data, not as a trustworthy biography of your life.
• Do not share secrets, third-party personal data, legal details, medical records, passwords or financial information with an AI companion.
• Upgrade only for a repeated use case such as journaling, voice practice or conversation rehearsal, not because one intimate exchange felt convincing.
• Avoid Replika for teenagers; Apple lists the app as 18+ and the category carries obvious age-assurance and dependency risks.
• Use Replika as a supplement to human support, not a therapist, crisis service, partner replacement or only emotional outlet.
• Check in-app pricing immediately before subscribing because public help pages say store prices and features can change.
• Review your usage monthly: the app should expand human life, not replace the social friction that makes relationships real.

Conclusion

Replika in 2026 is a better companion product than its older reputation suggests. It is warmer, more contextual, more visually polished and more ambitious about memory. It can be genuinely helpful for adults who want a patient conversation partner, a journaling prompt, a voice on a quiet walk or a private place to rehearse difficult sentences before saying them to another person.

The same strengths explain the caution. Emotional fluency creates trust faster than institutional safeguards can always justify. Pricing pushes the most immersive features into paid tiers. Memory is improving but still fragile. Privacy remains a serious question because the most useful companion data is also the most intimate. Regulatory history, safety research and user grief after model changes all point to the same lesson: AI companions are not ordinary apps.

The balanced verdict is therefore conditional. Replika is worth trying if you enter with boundaries, avoid sensitive disclosures and judge it by whether it improves your real life. It is not worth treating as a therapist, soulmate or secure personal archive. The open question for 2026 is whether companion apps can become more emotionally capable without becoming more emotionally extractive. Replika is one of the closest products to that line, which makes it fascinating, useful and risky at the same time.

FAQs

Is Replika worth it in 2026?

Yes, for casual companionship, journaling and conversation practice. No, if you need therapy, guaranteed privacy, perfect memory or a real relationship substitute. Start free, test repeated use, then upgrade only if paid features support a healthy routine.

How much does Replika Pro cost in 2026?

Replika does not publish one clean universal public price. Its help centre says prices appear in-app and in the relevant store. Apple’s US listing shows monthly SKUs at $7.99 and $14.99, annual SKUs at $49.99 and $69.99, and Annual Ultra at $79.99.

What do you get with Replika Ultra?

Ultra includes everything in Pro, plus smarter conversations, elevated emotional intelligence, daily self-reflections and the ability to save messages to memory and view which memories are used during conversations. Replika’s help centre says Ultra is available as an annual plan.

Can Replika replace a therapist?

No. Replika can help users reflect, practise language and feel less alone, but it is not a licensed clinician, crisis service or evidence-based treatment provider. People using it for emotional support should keep human support and professional care available.

Is Replika private enough for sensitive journaling?

Not for highly sensitive journaling. Replika’s privacy policy says messages and content, including photos, videos, voice and text messages, can be processed to personalise interactions. Use it for reflection, but avoid secrets, medical details, legal issues and third-party data.

Is Replika safe for teenagers?

Replika is not a good choice for teenagers. Apple lists the app as 18+, and companion apps can encourage emotional dependency, oversharing and unrealistic relationship expectations. Parents should use supervised educational or wellbeing tools instead.

Why does Replika forget things?

AI memory depends on storage, retrieval and interpretation. A companion may store a fact but fail to retrieve it, use an old fact in the wrong context or overemphasise one emotional disclosure. Correct bad memories and avoid relying on memory for important decisions.

What is the best Replika alternative?

Character.AI is better for public characters and role-play, Kindroid for custom companion design, Nomi for multiple companions, and ChatGPT for general assistance. Replika remains strongest for a single emotionally framed companion with avatar, voice and memory.

References

Apple. (2026). Replika – AI Friend. App Store. https://apps.apple.com/us/app/replika-ai-friend/id1158555867

Character.AI. (2026). Upgrade to c.ai+. https://character.ai/subscribe

European Data Protection Board. (2025). AI: the Italian Supervisory Authority fines company behind chatbot Replika. https://www.edpb.europa.eu/news/national-news/2025/ai-italian-supervisory-authority-fines-company-behind-chatbot-replika_en

Juneja, P., & Lomidze, L. (2026). Persona-grounded safety evaluation of AI companions in multi-turn conversations. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.00227

Kindroid. (2026). Subscriptions. Kindroid Help Center. https://kindroid.ai/docs/article/subscriptions/

Luka, Inc. (2026). Privacy Policy. Replika. https://replika.com/legal/privacy/en

Luka, Inc. (2026). Terms of Service. Replika. https://replika.com/legal/terms/en

Replika. (2026). Choosing a Subscription. Replika Help Center. https://help.replika.com/hc/en-us/articles/39551043419149-Choosing-a-Subscription

Rödder, T. (2026, February 9). AI can’t replace a therapist, but millions use it like one. MindSite News. https://mindsitenews.org/2026/02/09/replikas-eugenia-kuyda-doesnt-believe-in-regulation/