New Fitness Bands from Google, Amazfit, and Garmin

For those who prefer a classic watch or find wearable technology cumbersome, fitness bands without displays offer a way to track health metrics and workouts. These devices may not provide the precision needed for tracking a 10K run or navigating in remote areas without cell service, but they cater to users looking for unobtrusive devices that can be worn alongside traditional timepieces while still collecting health, sleep, and activity data.

One company that has successfully captured the attention of affluent customers is Whoop. Founded in 2012 in the United States, Whoop views its hardware as a gateway to an analytical platform that derives actionable insights from continuous body data regarding sleep, training, and recovery. Will Ahmed, co-founder and current CEO, created a wearable sensor to better understand his body’s performance and recovery needs while serving as captain of the Harvard squash team. Today, the company claims that its wearable device promotes "measurably better health." Whoop is privately valued at $10 billion, despite its subscription service costing up to €400 annually in Europe.

Affordable Alternatives

In search of more budget-friendly options, we tested three fitness bands that do not require a subscription, although additional paid services are available for under €100 per year.

When placed side by side, two of the contenders appear quite similar. The newly released Garmin Cirqa Smart Band measures 27 millimeters wide and is priced at €200. On the other hand, Amazfit's Helio Strap, which costs €100, is 24 millimeters wide. The newcomer is Google's Fitbit Air, also priced at €100, but measuring just 17 millimeters. Both Google and Garmin offer various bands in different lengths, and third-party manufacturers provide armbands for upper-arm wear.

Sensor Technology

The design of all three bands is similar, featuring a removable sensor located on the underside. This sensor functions like a smartwatch without a display, equipped with the standard LEDs found in fitness trackers. Vital signs are measured using photoplethysmography, which involves shining light on the skin and measuring the amount reflected. Since blood absorbs light, fluctuations in light reflection can indicate blood volume changes, allowing for the calculation of various physiological parameters such as heart rate, resting pulse, heart rate variability, and blood oxygen saturation. Additionally, an accelerometer and gyroscope are included to track movement.

The charging mechanisms vary significantly among the devices. Garmin employs a proprietary charging connector similar to those used in its Fenix series and other sports watches. Amazfit uses a magnetic charging dock with two pogo pins, compact enough to fit in a travel bag. Google’s charging solution is a magnetic adapter with two tiny pogo pins that are prone to damage, and the cable is permanently attached to the adapter. After charging, all three bands offer about a week of battery life, although this duration depends heavily on the number of recorded sports activities.

It's important to note that none of the three bands come with a built-in GPS receiver. This limitation is inconsequential for indoor treadmill workouts or strength training, but for those wanting to accurately track cycling routes or morning runs, a smartphone is necessary. Without it, the distance covered will only be estimated.

Users can initiate an activity in two ways: by setting the app to automatically detect workouts or by manually selecting the sport in the app to start and stop tracking. The automatic detection can be hit or miss in terms of accuracy.

App Dependency

The manual method tends to be less frustrating: users can choose the sport from the app and start tracking on their smartphone, which also serves to end the session. Only the Garmin band features a physical button, allowing users to start and stop workouts without needing their phone. However, users must first designate the activity type in the app.

All data, metrics, and analyses are managed through the respective apps, available on both major smartphone platforms. A significant advantage is that all data is consolidated within a single app ecosystem, allowing users to switch hardware seamlessly. For instance, one might wear the Garmin band during the day and while sleeping, and use the Garmin sports watch exclusively for training, with all metrics being integrated.

In Google’s ecosystem, compatibility exists with the Google Pixel Watch and all Fitbit devices, while Amazfit supports all its sports watches, along with the Helio Ring, a smart ring. However, integrating devices into third-party ecosystems can be challenging, often requiring workarounds like Health Connect on Android.

A comparative look at the sports ecosystems reveals notable differences. Garmin emphasizes capturing a wide array of details and metrics for serious athletes, focusing on hard data and allowing extensive analysis and export options via web browsers. The Garmin Connect Plus subscription, priced at €9 monthly or €90 annually, offers additional analytical capabilities, personalized nutrition recommendations, and a virtual assistant for generating insights, albeit without the ability to ask questions.

In contrast, Google Health Premium is more user-friendly, costing €10 monthly, and it can respond to personal queries regarding workout plans and post-exercise nutrition. Amazfit offers a "wellness coach" that provides performance analysis as part of its subscription service.

However, professional athletes may find a significant drawback in both Amazfit and Google ecosystems: all analyses and evaluations are limited to the app and not accessible via web browsers. Users can export individual activities to third-party platforms like Strava for further evaluation if necessary.

Sleep Tracking Limitations

All three bands struggle with accurately measuring sleep and displaying sleep stages. Based on our experiences, the sleep data from these fitness trackers is often invalid. However, keeping track of nighttime rest periods can still be beneficial.

When it comes to sports and health tracking, the data from these bands is generally reliable. We compared the measurements with those from a sports watch and found them consistent, though they do not replace the detailed analytics provided by a watch after a workout. Overall, all three trackers are commendable, with the Garmin band standing out as the most professional and accurate option.

The attractive pricing of the Helio Strap and Fitbit Air makes them appealing for those who want to keep an eye on their activities and health. This concept echoes the initial launch of fitness bands over 15 years ago, reminiscent of pioneers like Jawbone. Now, these products are making a comeback with fresh ideas.