comparisons

Published by Floriva · Updated 2026-05-01 · How Floriva checks its guides

Floriva vs Premom: Privacy Architecture After the FTC Enforcement

Floriva vs Premom compared on privacy and data handling. Premom faced FTC enforcement in 2023 for sharing health data without consent. Floriva keeps core records local-first.

The FTC took enforcement action against Premom in 2023 for sharing users' sensitive health data with third parties without consent. Premom is cloud-based and requires an account. Floriva keeps core records on your device and optional sync is encrypted so Floriva cannot read synced records. If you're evaluating Premom after the FTC action, the question is whether policy changes fix an architectural problem.

In 2023, the FTC found that Premom shared users' fertility and pregnancy data with third-party companies, including AppsFlyer and Google, without adequate consent. This was not a breach. It was a business practice. The company chose to share your reproductive health data, got caught, and faced enforcement.

Floriva keeps core records on your device. There is no readable central cycle database to share from, no third-party SDK receiving your cycle data, and no comparable health-event sharing practice to discover through an FTC investigation.

The Core Difference

Premom's privacy failure was not a bug. It was a feature of cloud-based architecture combined with an ad-tech business model. When your data exists on a company's servers, the company can share it. Whether they will depends on policy, incentives, and oversight. The FTC found that Premom's incentives won.

Floriva's architecture reduces that readable-data sharing risk. Core records stay on your device. There is no readable central cycle copy to share with AppsFlyer or Google.

Data Architecture

Premom requires an account and stores data on cloud servers. The FTC enforcement action revealed that the app included third-party SDKs that received user health data. This is a common pattern in free apps: analytics and advertising SDKs embedded in the app send data to third parties as part of normal operation. Users had no meaningful way to know this was happening.

After enforcement, Premom stated it changed its practices. The architecture (cloud-based, account-required, server-stored) has not changed. The third-party SDKs may have been modified, but the capability to share data server-side remains built into the architecture.

Floriva keeps core records local-first. No account is required for core tracking. No third-party SDKs receive health events. Optional sync is end-to-end encrypted, so Floriva cannot read synced cycle records.

Features

Premom's strongest feature is its connected ovulation test strip reader. You photograph a test strip, Premom reads the result, and logs your LH levels automatically. For users doing active fertility tracking with ovulation tests, this hardware integration is valuable and not available from on-device competitors.

Premom also offers detailed fertility charting, community features, and pregnancy content. It is purpose-built for trying to conceive.

Floriva tracks cycles, symptoms, and patterns without connected hardware. It does not read ovulation test strips. If hardware integration is core to your fertility tracking workflow, this is a meaningful gap.

Pricing

Premom: Free tier with premium subscription. The free tier's economics should be understood in light of the FTC enforcement. Free apps need revenue sources, and Premom's included sharing user data with third parties.

Floriva: Paid subscription, no free tier. The subscription is the revenue model. When the user pays, the user is the customer. When the app is free, the data is often the product. The FTC confirmed that pattern with Premom.

Who Should Choose Floriva vs Premom

Choose Premom if: connected ovulation test reading is essential to your fertility tracking and you are comfortable with cloud-based storage after the FTC enforcement. Premom's hardware integration is genuinely useful for LH surge tracking.

Choose Floriva if: the FTC enforcement against Premom concerns you, you want architectural privacy rather than policy-based privacy, or you do not need connected hardware. See how period tracker apps collect data to understand the broader data-sharing patterns that Premom exemplified.

The Privacy Bottom Line

Premom showed what can happen when a cloud-based health app decides to monetize your data. The FTC had to intervene because users had no way to know and no way to stop it. Policy changes after enforcement do not change the underlying architecture. Premom can still share your data. They have promised not to, again.

Floriva reduces company-side sharing risk with architecture, not only promises. Core records stay on your device, and optional sync is encrypted so Floriva cannot read synced cycle records. Website, billing, support, backups, and exports are separate risks.