Scientifically Speaking, Which Fitness Device is Most Accurate?

Scientifically Speaking, Which Fitness Device is Most Accurate?

For those that follow along here, you know I’m an avid fan of the Microsoft Band. But, probably like you, I’m in constant wonder if I’ve either made the right decision to stick with the Microsoft Band or if it might be time to test the latest round of new wearables. I’ve tested other fitness devices and come to my personal conclusions, but I’m always open to hearing about the capabilities of other devices. I was even recently enticed to test the new Garmin Vivofit 2, and found out that it lacks a built-in GPS despite having the other Microsoft Band features. It was the waterproofing and long battery life that ultimately lured me in.

There’s a huge crowd of fitness-seeking people who want to ensure they have chosen the most accurate device available. I’ve said it before, it’s not really about accuracy but about setting a personal baseline and then making improvements over time to reach fitness goals. However, those goals can be tainted and harder to reach by using an inaccurate device – particularly one that is off-the-charts inaccurate.

T3, the gadget website, enlisted the help of Guru Performance, a UK-based nutrition and wellness company, to test the Microsoft Band 2, the Apple watch, the Fitbit Charge HR and the Garmin Vivosmart HR in its Human Performance Lab. The results? Well, it’s hard to argue against science. The results surprised T3, particularly on how inaccurate the major fitness wearable brands tend to be. For those Microsoft Band owners like me, you can rest easy.

Fitness Tracker Comparison - Microsoft Band 2, Apple watch, Fitbit Charge HR and the Garmin Vivosmart HR

Fitness Tracker Test: How we tested

Hide comments


  • Allowed HTML tags: <em> <strong> <blockquote> <br> <p>

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.