How to solve Guideline 4.3(b) - Design - Spam
If you’re reading this article, you probably received this heartbreaking rejection from Apple Review team “Guideline 4.3(b) - Design - Spam”:
Your app primarily features XYZ that duplicate the content and functionality of similar apps in a saturated category. These app features may be useful, informative or entertaining, and your app may include features or characteristics that distinguish it. However, there are already enough of these apps on the App Store. Next Steps: We encourage you to reconsider your app concept and submit a new app that provides a unique experience not already found on the App Store.
You probably think, “WTF?! There are hundreds of the same apps released every day, and only mine gets rejected?” This is the mystery of Apple’s review process. Unfortunately, arguments like “there are dozens of similar apps you approved, and only mine was rejected” won’t help.
Yeah… this one hurts, but it’s actually a signal, not a death sentence. This is not about bugs. Not about UI. Not about content quality. It’s about category saturation. And this is exactly where founders usually misunderstand App Store Review process.
Review team thinks: “We have thousands of apps doing this exact thing.”
Even if yours is better. Even if yours is beautiful. Even if yours is more accurate. Apple does not care.
Why Apple Rejects Apps for ‘Spam’
From Apple’s perspective, the App Store is under attack by: no-code templates, clone apps, AI-generated junk, white-label SaaS wrappers, and “10 apps from one codebase” founders. So when your app hits review, Apple isn’t asking “Is this useful?” They’re asking: “Is this another clone polluting the store?” And that’s where many serious founders get killed by accident. Your app might be real. Your product might be unique. Your business might be legit. But, 4.3 - Spam.
Apple Review Team regularly rejects apps under Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam when they believe an app falls into one of these categories:
Too similar to existing apps in terms of functionality, design, or concept, differing only in minor details such as content, language, or color scheme.
Part of an oversaturated category, eg, dating, VPNs, horoscopes, tarot, drinking games, fortune telling, flashlight apps, and more, where hundreds of nearly identical solutions already exist.
White-label products or clones built purely to occupy more slots in the App Store.
Apple’s reasoning is simple: these apps clutter the marketplace, make it harder for users to discover genuinely new products, and ultimately lower the overall quality of the App Store. We may disagree, but Apple sets the rules for its own ecosystem.
There’s also Guideline 4.3(b), just as unforgiving. It frequently hits VPNs, crypto bots, GPT-based assistants, and other utility apps.
How apps survive Design - Spam Rejection
Let’s assume you are building an astrology app. Apps that pass 4.3 are never: “An astrology app”. They are:
“A dating app powered by astrology”
“A therapy app using astrology”
“A daily journaling app guided by astrology”
“A career planning app using natal charts”
“A kids learning app with zodiac stories”
“A gamified astrology RPG”
“A relationship coach using synastry”
“A self-discovery app using archetypes”
Astrology must become the engine, not the product.
What will get you approved
Change your App Store positioning. Explain why your product is not a generic app. Remember, “better, nicer, faster” is not enough. You should have a unique perspective.
Patience is your first and most valuable tool. Losing your temper, especially in emails to the App Review Team, has never sped up a review and often only makes matters worse.
Pointing out that your app is available on Google Play won’t help either. For Apple, citing its most aggressive competitor is more likely to raise eyebrows than earn sympathy.
Before taking any action, reread Apple’s message carefully. Items (a) and (b) may look similar, but their meanings are not the same, and those nuances matter.
One of the most common mistakes is trying to “repaint” the app. Slight UI tweaks or small content changes will not satisfy Guideline 4.3 - Design - Spam. If your app only differs in colors, languages, or minor details, another rejection is almost guaranteed. Cosmetic updates waste time, energy, and morale.
Important: never attempt to resubmit a spam-flagged app from a different developer account. That shortcut can turn a temporary setback into a permanent problem.
Appeals should be handled with care as well. Submitting one without making real changes rarely helps and simply burns your opportunity. The same goes for resubmissions: sending the app back repeatedly without meaningful updates invites deeper scrutiny and increases the risk of an account ban.
What actually works? Originality. Add features that truly set your product apart. Not just more technology, an AI chat won’t impress anyone when everyone else is doing the same. Apple is looking for functionality that delivers real, tangible value to users.
Sometimes the right move is more radical: rethinking the concept, reshaping the product, or injecting genuine creativity into the experience. That kind of reinvention is often what turns a rejection into approval.
And above all, don’t be discouraged. A “design spam” rejection isn’t the end of the road, it’s simply Apple asking you to take a more thoughtful, more distinctive next step.
High-risk App Niches in 2026
You risk getting design spam from Apple if your app falls into these niches:
Astrology, horoscopes, tarot reading, esotericism
Dating apps
Journals, note-taking apps, habit trackers
VPN services
GPT wrappers (if it’s just a gateway to OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Anthropic’s Claude, Grok, or other models)
Any white-label solutions (the same codebase with different skins/themes/content)
If you’re planning to launch in one of these niches, just be extra mindful. And keep focusing on making something great. Good luck 😉