CSS Reviews & Ratings October 2026
CSS reviews: the verdict
Reviewers report a consistent pattern of dissatisfaction with CSS, averaging 2.7 out of 5 across 86 reviews from two portals, with no improvement in the last 12 months. Customers describe long wait times, unresponsive agents, and unresolved issues, particularly in the customer service theme, which received 23 mentions, 35% positive, 65% negative. The most common criticism centers on poor follow-up after initial contact. While some note the website is easy to navigate, this positive point is outweighed by repeated complaints about service reliability and communication.
Key findings
- Across 86 reviews on 2 portals, the recency-weighted average is 2.7 out of 5.
- The last 12 months average 2.7 out of 5 from 43 reviews.
- 72% of the reviews come from Apple App Store.
- Customer service(15)
- Quality(13)
- Ordering & website(8)
Derived from the analyzed reviews; each chip links to the page with the cited evidence.
86 reviews · 2 portals · 2023-12 – 2026-09 · Methodology ↗ · Verify a quote ↗
What changed in September 2026
In September 2026, 10 new reviews were analyzed; the average rating moved from 3.5 to 2.5 stars.
- New reviews
- 10
- Average rating
- 2.5/5 (3.5 ↓)
- Positive share
- 30% (50% ↓)
Most-discussed themes
- Customer service — +4 vs prior month
- Ordering & website — +1 vs prior month
- Billing & payment — +1 vs prior month
- Communication — +1 vs prior month
- Delivery — unchanged
CSS rating trend and sentiment
Months with fewer than 5 rated reviews are left out.
Data as table
| Month | Avg. rating | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 2025-10 | 3.25 | 4 |
| 2025-11 | 3.00 | 2 |
| 2025-12 | 3.00 | 6 |
| 2026-01 | 4.00 | 1 |
| 2026-02 | 1.00 | 2 |
| 2026-03 | 1.25 | 4 |
| 2026-04 | 4.00 | 1 |
| 2026-05 | 1.00 | 1 |
| 2026-06 | 2.80 | 5 |
| 2026-07 | 3.67 | 3 |
| 2026-08 | 3.50 | 4 |
| 2026-09 | 2.50 | 10 |
Data as table
| Month | Positive | Neutral | Negative | Count |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-10 | 50% | 0% | 50% | 4 |
| 2025-11 | 50% | 0% | 50% | 2 |
| 2025-12 | 33% | 17% | 50% | 6 |
| 2026-01 | 100% | 0% | 0% | 1 |
| 2026-02 | 0% | 0% | 100% | 2 |
| 2026-03 | 0% | 0% | 100% | 4 |
| 2026-04 | 0% | 100% | 0% | 1 |
| 2026-05 | 0% | 0% | 100% | 1 |
| 2026-06 | 0% | 20% | 80% | 5 |
| 2026-07 | 67% | 0% | 33% | 3 |
| 2026-08 | 50% | 0% | 50% | 4 |
| 2026-09 | 30% | 10% | 60% | 10 |
Themes over time
Data as table
| Month | Customer service | Quality | Ordering & website | Billing & payment | Communication | Value for money |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-08 | - | - | - | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| 2024-09 | - | - | - | - | 1.0 | - |
| 2024-12 | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - |
| 2025-01 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 3.0 | - | - | - |
| 2025-02 | - | 1.0 | - | - | - | - |
| 2025-03 | - | - | 1.0 | - | 1.0 | - |
| 2025-05 | 1.0 | 1.0 | - | 1.0 | - | - |
| 2025-06 | 5.0 | 3.0 | - | - | - | - |
| 2025-07 | 3.7 | 1.0 | 5.0 | 1.0 | - | 1.0 |
| 2025-08 | - | 3.0 | - | - | - | - |
| 2025-09 | - | - | - | - | - | 1.0 |
| 2025-10 | 3.0 | - | 2.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | - |
| 2025-11 | 3.0 | - | - | - | 1.0 | - |
| 2025-12 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 1.5 | - | - | - |
| 2026-02 | - | - | 1.0 | - | - | - |
| 2026-03 | 1.0 | 1.0 | - | 1.5 | - | - |
| 2026-04 | - | - | - | - | 4.0 | - |
| 2026-06 | 1.0 | 3.0 | 3.5 | - | 3.0 | - |
| 2026-07 | 1.0 | 5.0 | - | - | - | - |
| 2026-08 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 3.0 | - | - | - |
| 2026-09 | 2.6 | 1.0 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 1.0 | 5.0 |
Latest CSS customer voices
The most recent review passages across all portals. Each quote links to its source.
Short excerpts - full reviews are available at the original source.
„Why they don’t prevent anything before selling the insurance“
„CSS is telling that they don’t cover anything related to trips to Venezuela“
„They aren't covering what they are supposed to cover by law.“
„It manages to frustrate the user quite a bit.“
„The app has no such functionality.“
„The web portal claims you need to open a time-line in the app to start any treatment.“
What Reddit users say about CSS
From 7 Reddit threads that mention CSS. Community posts are opinions, not verified purchases.
Below are extracts from Reddit discussions - each linked to the original thread.
„the thing that frustrates me the most and feels the most like an endless crap shoot is the ...“
„css is my biggest bottleneck“
CSS review themes at a glance
Every theme is backed by classified review text. Open a theme to read its analysis.
Customer service23× mentions
8positive15negativeQuality19× mentions
4positive13negativeOrdering & website12× mentions
3positive8negativeBilling & payment7× mentions
1positive6negativeCommunication7× mentions
0positive6negativeValue for money3× mentions
1positive2negativeDelivery3× mentions
2positive1negativeReturns & refunds1× mentions
0positive1negativeDurability1× mentions
0positive1negativeFit & sizing1× mentions
0positive1negative
CSS review sources, coverage and method
The overall 2.7 / 5 score is recency-weighted: newer reviews count more (weight 0.9 per month of age), regardless of portal.
| Portal | Avg. rating | Count | Weight | Latest | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apple App Store | 3.0 / 5 | 62 | 72.1% | View profile ↗ | |
| Trustpilot | 1.5 / 5 | 24 | 27.9% | View profile ↗ | |
| Weighted overall | 2.7 / 5 | 86 | 100% | ||
Period covered: 2023-12 – 2026-09. Reviews older than 24 months stay in the trend charts but no longer feed the headline figures.
What this analysis cannot cover
- Only publicly visible reviews are included; nothing behind a login, and no reviews submitted to us directly.
- Sentiment is classified from the review text, never from the star rating. Unclassified reviews count toward totals but not toward sentiment shares.
What this analysis covers
- Apple App Store : 62 reviews
- Trustpilot : 24 reviews
Period covered: Dec 2023 – Sept 2026
And what it cannot cover:
- The App Store feed caps at about 500 reviews per country storefront.
- Trustpilot exposes roughly the 200 most recent reviews publicly; older reviews sit behind a login.
How the numbers are made
Every review is read once by a language model that labels its themes and sentiment and picks short verbatim passages. Recent reviews weigh more than old ones (each month of age discounts the weight by 10%). Quotes are shown exactly as written, linked to the original review, and cryptographically signed so you can check they have not been altered.Full methodology ↗ · Transparency report ↗
What AI assistants say about CSS
based on 90 analysed AI answers
Our analysis of AI-assistant output — not the assistants’ raw text.
Cite this page
Citatio (2026). CSS Reviews October 2026 – 2.7/5 from 86 reviews. Retrieved 7 October 2026 from https://citatio.ai/css-reviews/
Data verifiable via our public audit log: Methodology · Transparency