While the recent Fitbit Edge and screen-less Fitbit Air are the hottest fitness trackers of 2026, Samsung appears set to launch a direct competitor to the former in the near-ish future.

The Samsung Galaxy Fit 4 would replace 2024’s Samsung Galaxy Fit 3, a small tracker with a large display and support for some of Samsung’s best holistic tools, borrowed from the higher-end Galaxy Watch line.

What might the Galaxy Fit 4 bring to the table, and will it be enough to beat the Fitbit Edge, arguably the best fitness tracker for most people on the market today? Here’s everything we know (and think we know) about the Galaxy Fit 4 based on recent rumors and leaks.

Samsung Galaxy Fit 4: Price prediction

The Samsung Galaxy Fit 3 debuted globally in 2024 but wasn’t available in the U.S. until winter 2025. A launch price of $59 made the Galaxy Fit 3 one of the best bang-for-your-buck fitness trackers on the market at the time, undercutting even the popular Fitbit Inspire 3.

I’ve yet to see any pricing rumors for the Galaxy Fit 4, but based on its predecessor's cost and Samsung’s history of beating the competition, price-wise, I’d be willing to bet that the Galaxy Fit 4 is a little more than the Galaxy Fit 3 (to account for inflation, at least) but still less than the $99 Fitbit Air.

Samsung Galaxy Fit 4: Design and display rumors

Based on leaked blueprints of the device from earlier this year, first shared by Android Authority, the Galaxy Fit 4 is tipped to feature a rectangular case with a decently sized AMOLED touchscreen and a single physical button on the side, just like its predecessor and the Fitbit Edge.

In terms of display specs, the older model features a rectangular 1.6-inch AMOLED panel with 256 x 402 pixels of resolution and a max brightness of around 600 nits. What might the Galaxy Fit 4 feature?

My guess is that the screen size will stay the same. However, according to a recently published report from SammyGuru — which allegedly previewed an unreleased version of the companion app — the new model will have a slightly higher-res 258 × 428-pixel display than its predecessor.

In terms of brightness, given advancements in display technology over the past few years, there’s a good chance the Galaxy Fit 4 will also offer a higher maximum brightness than its predecessor for better readability in bright daylight.

What about the overall aesthetic of the wearable? A mostly aluminum case is likely, and you can also probably expect at least three color options, including black and white, with either blue or green replacing the Galaxy Fit 3's pink model.

Samsung Galaxy Fit 4: Possible features

The Samsung Galaxy Fit 4 is slated to have the brand’s GH3036 health sensor array for continuous heart rate monitoring and other holistic tracking capabilities. This information comes from Samsung’s own documents, first reported on by Android Authority.

New stress tracking and management tools could be in the cards, based on more recent insider reports; automatic workout detection is also rumored.

But beyond basic health, sleep, and fitness tracking, there’s still a lot we don’t know about the Galaxy Fit 4, feature-wise. For example, will it gain GPS for location tracking without a paired phone or NFC for contactless payments? Its predecessor lacks both, and either would be a welcome upgrade.

Like the Galaxy Fit 3, I fully expect the new model to offer safety tools like fall detection and emergency SOS, along with important health monitoring features like instant blood oxygen saturation (SpO2) readings, daily sleep scores, high/low pulse notifications, and snore detection.

Another upgrade I’d like to see is the addition of sleep apnea detection, something you’ll find on the best Samsung watches but not the Galaxy Fit 3.

Finally, the Galaxy Fit 3 is rated at an impressive 13 days of battery per charge. With the Galaxy Fit 4, battery life will likely be comparable, that is, unless Samsung outfits the wearable with a power-hungry GPS antenna.

Samsung Galaxy Fit 4: Outlook

Even if the Samsung Galaxy Fit 4 gains GPS and NFC and sells for a lower price than the competition, namely Fitbit, one major factor could ultimately limit its popularity: lack of iOS support.

While Google’s top-of-the-line wearables like the Pixel Watch 5 are Android-only, the brand’s line of Fitbit fitness trackers all play nicely with both Android and iOS devices.

This is to say, if Samsung is serious about making a dent in Google’s dominance in the wallet-friendly fitness tracker market, making the Galaxy Fit 4 multi-platform would be a wise first step.

What are your thoughts on a potential Samsung Galaxy Fit 4 fitness tracker? Which new features would you most like to see? Let me know below.

More from Tom's Guide

• 3 reasons why I’m glad Google didn’t give the Fitbit Edge NFC
• Fitbit Air review: I tested the Fitbit Air for a week, and it's the best Whoop alternative for the rest of us
• I've been using the Fitbit Air for over a week, and my favorite feature has completely changed the way I wake up

The Garmin Fenix 9 and Fenix 9 Pro watches launched recently and that means you can expect some seriously good deals on the Garmin Fenix 8 and Fenix 8 Pro in the Black Friday sales this year.

I’ve tested every Fenix and Epix model since the Fenix 5 Pro and will be keeping a sharp eye on older models of the watch in the sales, and a great deal on the Garmin Fenix 8 has already appeared on Amazon.

You can get the 47mm model of the Garmin Fenix 8 for $755 at Amazon right now, which is very close to its lowest price ever of $749.

This seems to be the only model of the Garmin Fenix 8 reduced so heavily right now, and the catch is that at the time of writing only 18 watches are left in stock, so you’ll have to move with alacrity to take advantage of this deal.

I ran two marathons with the Garmin Fenix 8 during my testing of the watch, and it’s undoubtedly a superb option for amateur athletes and adventurers.

It has a durable and attractive design, reliably accurate sports tracking, extensive training analysis and best-in-class maps and navigation features.

More importantly, it has almost all the key features available on the newer Fenix 8 Pro and Fenix 9 watches. These include almost all of the new software features that arrived on the Fenix 9, which are rolling back to the Fenix 8 through updates.

The new watches have some exclusive extras though, with the most important being the LTE and satellite connectivity available on the Fenix 8 Pro and Fenix 9 Pro.

There are also some design upgrades on the Fenix 9 Pro, which has a full titanium case, and other minor updates, but having tested all of these watches I’d say the Fenix 8 largely matches the new models in all the main areas aside from connectivity, and it comes in so much cheaper thanks to this deal I think it’s definitely a better value buy.

Earlier this week, my colleague Dan walked 6,000 steps with the new Fitbit Edge and the Apple Watch Series 12 to test which was more accurate when it comes to one of the most basic smartwatch requirements: step counting. Dan found that the $179 Fitbit Edge came out on top of the $399 Apple Watch Series 12. Keen to find out more, I strapped both to my wrist and repeated the test.

Sure, both of these trackers will do a lot more than just count your steps. The Apple Watch Series 12 is like having an extension of your iPhone on your wrist, and is the best smartwatch on the market for most people. The Fitbit Edge seems to toe the line between the $99 screenless Fitbit Air and the Google Pixel Watch 5 — a bright screen, built-in GPS, and a continuous heart rate monitor.

Like all these walk tests, I strapped one watch to each wrist and used a $5 clicker tool from Amazon to count my steps as I walked manually. Both trackers count steps using an internal accelerometer, which measures the swing of your arms. Each swing counts for two steps, and it doesn’t matter whether you wear your watch on your dominant or non-dominant hand. It doesn’t matter if you walk with your hands in your pockets or holding a cup of coffee; the accelerometer should still measure your body’s movement.

Read on to find out which came out on top. You can also read our Apple Watch Series 12 review and our Fitbit Edge review here on Tom’s Guide.

I walked another 8,000 steps with the Apple Watch 12 and Fitbit Edge: Here’s which came out on top

As with all of the best Apple Watches, the Apple Watch Series 12 still doesn’t tell you the number of steps you’ve taken during a specific workout; instead, you see an overall number of steps throughout the day, which you can now pin to your home screen. This is probably because steps aren’t actually that useful a metric beyond a certain point, but annoying for me when writing these articles. For this comparison, I downloaded a third-party Pedometer+ app onto my Apple Watch.

I split this walk up into three different walks, manually clicking each time I took a step. When I got home, I downloaded my data.

Walk one

Walk two

Walk three

Results

As you can see from the results, this one is incredibly close. The Apple Watch Series 12 overcounted by 23 steps; the Fitbit Edge missed 71 steps. With only 50 steps between them, it’s a tough one to call, but unlike Dan, I can say the Apple Watch Series 12 was slightly ahead here.

It’s worth noting that 50-70 steps is pretty much spot on. The average person takes 2,000 steps a mile, so an extra 23 steps is nothing.

To really compare these two watches head-to-head, you’d need to look at more than just how well they count steps. Both are designed to be worn 24/7 and help you track more than just walking workouts.

However, there are some big differences: as mentioned above, the Apple Watch Series 12 is designed to be an extension of your iPhone on your wrist, with plenty of apps at your disposal. The Fitbit Edge, on the other hand, is definitely more of a basic fitness tracker than a smartwatch.

We’ll continue to test and compare the two watches, but which would you buy?

More from Tom's Guide

• I walked 5,500 steps with the Apple Watch 12 vs Garmin Venu 4 — here's the winner
• Apple Watch Series 12 vs Apple Watch Ultra 4: Which new Apple Watch should you buy?
• I’ve tested over 100 fitness trackers head-to-head — 3 workout stats I trust the least

Another day, another walk test on the Tom’s Guide fitness desk, and this time it’s the new Fitbit Edge on test against the Garmin Forerunner 70 — Garmin’s most affordable Forerunner running watch. If you’ve been around here long enough, you’ll know one of the first things we do when a new device is released is look at how well it does the basics, and in this case, that’s counting steps.

Sure, both of these trackers will do a lot more than just count your steps. The Fitbit Edge seems to toe the line between the $99 screenless Fitbit Air and the Google Pixel Watch 5 — a bright screen, built-in GPS, and continuous heart rate monitor. The Garmin Forerunner 70 is Garmin’s $249 beginner-level running watch, with plenty of training tools on board and a bright AMOLED screen.

But which came out on top? Read on to find out more, and check out our Fitbit Edge review and Garmin Forerunner 70 review here on Tom’s Guide.

I walked 12,000 steps with the Fitbit Edge and the Garmin Forerunner 70: Here’s which tracker won

As with all these tests, I wore one device on each wrist and used an Amazon clicker to count every step I took manually. Both trackers count your steps using an internal accelerometer, which measures the swing of your arms.

Each swing counts for two steps, and it doesn’t matter whether you wear your watch on your dominant or non-dominant hand. It doesn’t matter if you walk with your hands in your pockets or holding a cup of coffee; the accelerometer should still measure your body’s movement.

I split the steps over four different walks, and when I got home, I downloaded all the data. Here are my results:

Walk one

Walk two

Walk three

Walk four

Results

As you can see from the results, the Fitbit Edge beat the Garmin Forerunner 70 during this walk test, only overcounting by 56 steps. That’s not to say the Garmin was inaccurate; however, it only overcounted 89 steps over the 12,500 I actually took.

It’s worth noting that 50-90 steps is pretty much spot on. The average person takes 2,000 steps a mile, so an extra 56-89 steps is nothing.

To really compare these two watches head-to-head, you’d need to look at more than just how well they count steps. Both are designed to be worn 24/7 and help you track more than just walking workouts.

The Fitbit Edge is largely designed to be worn as an overall fitness tracker, with a slim design, an ECG monitor and skin temperature reader, and basic built-in GPS. The Forerunner 70, on the other hand, is largely designed for runners, with more buttons to make it easier to navigate around the watch with sweaty fingers, a heart rate sensor and advanced metrics like running cadence, and highly consistent built-in GPS.

There are no ECG or skin temperature sensors on the budget Garmin; however, it’ll last 13 days between charges compared to the seven-day battery life of the Fitbit Edge.

Both are at a similar price point: $179 for the Fitbit Edge and $249 for the Garmin Forerunner. Which you choose largely depends on what you’re planning on using it for. If you’re looking for a tracker to wear 24/7 and give you a better understanding of your overall health, you’ll get a lot from the Fitbit Edge. If you’re training for your first 10k or half marathon, the Garmin Forerunner 70 is the better choice.

But which would you pick? Let us know in the poll below.

More from Tom's Guide

• I walked 5,500 steps with the Apple Watch 12 vs Garmin Venu 4 — here's the winner
• Apple Watch Series 12 vs Apple Watch Ultra 4: Which new Apple Watch should you buy?
• I’ve tested over 100 fitness trackers head-to-head — 3 workout stats I trust the least

With the Oura Ring 5, Fitbit Edge, and Garmin Cirqa dominating this year’s fitness tracker new releases, I was extremely excited to test out the lesser-known Luna Band. A screen-free, subscription-free fitness tracker, the Luna Band certainly looks the part.

But is looking the part enough to make it one of the best fitness trackers? The TL;DR is this: at some point in the future, yes. 100%. The Luna Band has so much potential. But right now? It doesn’t feel finished. There are tons of “Coming Soon” banners in the app, and you can’t customize any personal targets — which is such a shame, because I genuinely adored testing it. I would recommend buying it, but not for a few months.

I’ll get into all the gnarly details in this Luna Band review.

Luna Band review: Specs

Luna Band review: Price & availability

The Luna Band is $149 from Amazon U.S. and £129 direct from Luna in the U.K. This is $50 cheaper than the Garmin Cirqa and $50 cheaper than the Whoop 5.0 (from $199 to $369 per year).

However, the Fitbit Air ($99) and Amazfit Helio Strap ($99) both undercut the Luna Band by $50. The Luna Band looks much more appealing — and feels nicer on the skin — than the Amazfit Helio Strap and the silicone-y Fitbit Air strap (unless you pay extra for the upgraded knit option).

Luna Band review: Design

The Luna Band looks fantastic. I have nothing bad to say about its appearance. I tested the beige option, but it also comes in black and green. You get two straps, S-M and M-L, which are between 240mm and 295mm long. There’s a decent amount of Velcro at one end, so you can tighten the strap to your preference. I have wrists that can only be described as “Victorian child”, and it fit me perfectly without looking weird.

The Luna Band is also 5 ATM rated, which means you can wear it while swimming, but avoid high-impact water sports or scuba diving with it. I wore it in the ocean, and it both stayed put and didn’t get damaged.

The fabric not only looks good, but it doesn’t trap heat or sweat, unlike the silicone wristband on my Apple Watch SE 3.

Luna Band review: Fitness features

The Luna Band offers a huge range of fitness tracking functions. However, you have to go into the “Health and Activity” tab of the Luna app to start a workout — it’s not on the home page (even though surely it should be?).

Once I found the fitness section, I could scroll through 57 activities, although one of these is “Steam and Sauna Room,” not sure how “active” that one is. (To its credit, it does have a “Recovery” label next to it.)

There’s no onboard GPS, so when you go for hikes, cycles, or runs, it won’t generate a nice map like Amazfit Helio Strap or Garmin Cirqa — even if you take your phone with you. This band feels more suited to general lifestyle use rather than conscious training programs.

Automatic workout detection is a little blurry: I went for a run, but I clearly wasn’t running fast enough or long enough, as the Luna Band auto-detected a 4-minute run. This is a huge shame because my heart rate was between 144 and 162 BPM for thirty minutes on that day, but the band didn’t classify that as a run. There isn’t a huge amount of post-run analysis other than heart rate, so if you’re a serious runner, I’d recommend the Amazfit Helio Strap, Garmin Cirqa, or Fitbit Air instead.

However, this is also an issue on the Amazfit Helio Strap. After these hiccups, I learned my lesson — and started a workout manually from the app every time. After workouts, you get a nice heart rate zone bar chart and cardio versus strength efficiency.

I found the HRV to be somewhat unreliable. For a portion of my testing, I wore the Luna Band with my Amazfit Helio Strap, and the latter tracked my HRV at around 20 ms higher than the Luna Band. Of course, I can’t say for certain which was correct, but it’s worth mentioning.

Some features, like blood oxygen, are grayed out with a “Coming Soon” badge. There are tons of “Coming Soon” graphics in the app — I joked to my colleagues that it looks like a “Coming Soon” wasteland.

Unfortunately, I couldn’t test these “Coming Soon” areas. Does the blood oxygen saturation feature work? Who knows! For now, the Garmin Cirqa and Fitbit Air pip the Luna Band to the post here.

Luna Band review: Extra features

The Luna app is replete with cool, lifestyle-oriented features. The home page has your ideal daily plan (but you can’t change it — more on that) and your peak score. Everything else shows up in the “Health” tab.

Sleep tracking

Sleep tracking on the Luna Band is one of its standout features. It tracks from the moment you lie down rather than when you fall asleep, so you can see your precise sleep latency. You don’t have to do math, like with the Amazfit Helio Strap, which tracks from the moment you fall asleep. Remembering what time I put my phone down when I’m groggy in the morning is always a challenge.

Here’s a screenshot of an example night.

I love seeing the stratification of my sleep quality and my body’s response during the night. Tracking HRV is one of the most important things I look for in a fitness tracker.

However — and I’ll get into this in more detail in the “App” section — you can’t adjust your sleep targets. I don’t want my sleep target to be 7 hours; I want it to be 8 hours. You can’t change this because the band works out how much sleep it thinks I need. But I don’t care how much sleep the fitness tracker thinks I need — I want my target to be how much sleep I think I need. I checked with the built-in chatbot, and it told me you can’t customize these targets manually.

Peak score

At first, I hoped Peak Score would be more like Amazfit’s BioCharge feature, but it doesn’t really work like that. While BioCharge goes down during the day and resets at night, Peak Score uses your workout data, sleep data, and general wellbeing data to generate a set daily number. This means if you run a marathon, your peak score won’t change.

While this isn’t inherently wrong or bad, it’s worth noting if you’d like a dynamic number that reflects your activity for the day. For example, if you run in the morning and go to a boxing class in the evening and want to know how hard you can push yourself.

I like Peak Score, and I like Amazfit’s BioCharge. Both have their merits.

Luna Band review: App

The Luna app is less fitness-focused and more lifestyle-oriented. While it does still offer insights into energy, readiness, and so on, it also features tons of suggestions for eating, walking, and sleeping,

My prevailing thought regarding the app is that I wish Luna hadn’t released it unfinished. Because that’s what it is — unfinished. The app wants you to sleep for seven hours; walk 5,000 steps; burn 410 active calories; walk/run 8km a day. There’s no option to change any of these targets, or, if there is, it’s incredibly well-hidden — and the built-in AI chatbot doesn’t know how to change it either.

That brings me to my next point: there is, however, an AI chatbot in the app, because of course there is! I wish the Luna team had spent more time finishing the app — allowing you to actually set personal targets — rather than polishing said AI chatbot.

I don’t want to sleep for seven hours; I want to sleep for eight. I don’t want to walk 5,000 steps; I want to walk 10,000. Sure, you can do this manually, but I want the dopamine release of the app itself congratulating me for reaching my more difficult target.

It’s really unfortunate, because the app itself is beautifully laid out. The design team has done a great job. Everything is sleek, well-designed, and easy to understand. At first, I wondered if the app could do with more easily navigable customization tabs, but then I realised there were none. Again — a huge shame, because the Luna Band has serious potential.

However, there’s no subscription, which is a huge plus over Whoop, which requires a subscription, and the Fitbit Air and Garmin Cirqa, which lock some features behind a monthly paywall. Even so, I would recommend waiting for these “Coming Soon” features to actually arrive.

Luna Band review: Battery life

The Luna Band is rated for around 10 days. I found this accurate during testing — I charged it four times over a five-week period.

This battery life isn’t as good as the Whoop 5.0 (14 days) or Amazfit Helio Strap (14 days), but it’s better than the Fitbit Air (one week) and equals the Garmin Cirqa. I’m extremely happy with this battery life.

Should you buy the Luna Band?

Right now? No. I’d recommend waiting until the app is actually finished. There’s little point in investing in a new fitness tracker and learning the app when there’s actually not that much to learn right now.

This is such a shame, because I really enjoyed using the Luna Band. It’s sleek, pretty, inconspicuous. It’s much smaller and more feminine than the Amazfit Helio Strap, and cheaper than the Garmin Cirqa. On top of that, there’s no subscription, which is amazing.

Choosing the Luna Band’s rating was incredibly hard because I genuinely loved wearing this fitness tracker. Sleep tracking is fantastic. The app design is gorgeous. It’s just a shame Luna released it before it was ready.

Easy runs, otherwise known as zone 2 training, are having a moment. I mean, it has always existed, but as more and more people take on serious training plans ahead of half marathons, marathons, or even ultramarathons, preparation is key. And as any running coach will tell you, easy runs should feel easy.

If you're guilty of negative splits (your pace getting quicker as your run progresses), you could run the risk of overtraining and getting injured before you reach the start line.

Zone 2 refers to around 60-70% of your maximum heart rate, where you tap into fat for fuel. Training in this zone helps your body to become more efficient and producing energy without generating heaps of lactic acid. In short, you won't need days of recovery after these types of runs.

But if you're wearing a Coros Pace 4 and you're not sure how to tell whether you're in the correct heart rate zone, this quick how-to will help you set yours up.

On a scale of 1-10, Zone 2 should feel like a 3/4 out of 10. You should be able to maintain the pace for hours, or easily hold a conversation. This is known in fitness as your rate of perceived exertion, or RPE.

Yet if you’re running alone, this is where your smartwatch comes in. Keeping an eye on your heart rate zone ensures you’re not working too hard. So, let's get to it.

As you get fitter and stronger, your heart rate zones will change as your resting heart rate drops. You may need to re-test your thresholds as you go.

Note that Coros also uses % Threshold HR, or Lactate Threshold Zones. Zone 2 sits under Aerobic Endurance (typically around 80–90% of your threshold heart rate).

More from Tom's Guide

• Can the $99 Fitbit Air beat the $799 Apple Watch Ultra 3 at fitness tracking? I manually counted 4,500 steps to find out
• I walked 4,000 steps with the Apple Watch Ultra 3 vs Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 — and the winning margin was razor-thin
• Oura vs Whoop vs Fitbit Air — 5 questions to ask yourself before buying a screen-free fitness tracker

You don’t need to wait until Black Friday to lock in an epic deal on one of the year’s best smartwatches. The Garmin Instinct 3 AMOLED is my go-to smartwatch for outdoor adventures, and now it can be yours, too, for $100 off retail.

That’s right: this rugged, LED flashlight-sporting, battery-life champion is $349 on Amazon, down from $449, a seriously good price, and not far from its lowest-ever sale price of $299.

That said, if you want the best deal on the Garmin Instinct 3, it may be worth holding out a little longer. Of course, as with everything in life, nothing is guaranteed. But I digress.

I wear the Garmin Instinct 3 while running, walking, hiking, biking, e-mountain biking, snowboarding, snorkeling, and more. Aside from reliable tracking accuracy and excellent battery life, here are the three biggest reasons it’s one of my all-time favorite wearables.

Rugged, waterproof design

Most smartwatches offer just 50 meters of water resistance, enough protection for hand-washing and surface-level swims, but not high-impact water sports or scuba diving. However, similar to the Apple Watch Ultra 4, the Garmin Instinct 3 is rated for 100 meters of water resistance, so feel free to splash around.

The Instinct 3 also has an impact-resistant, metal-reinforced bezel that offers ample protection from bumps and drops. Meanwhile, five well-sized physical buttons make the Garmin a breeze to navigate, even with sweaty hands or gloves on.

Bright AMOLED screen

The Instinct 3 comes in several different flavors, including your choice of either a bright and well-saturated AMOLED screen or a duller-looking, monochromatic MIP display with solar charging. The advantage of the latter is better battery performance.

However, I’m a firm believer that the AMOLED variant is the better option because the screen is far more readable in a wider range of scenarios, including bright sunlight. Then again, when wearing polarized sunglasses, MIP has the advantage over AMOLED. Good thing the Garmin Instinct 3 Solar is also on sale for $50 off via Amazon right now.

Onboard LED flashlight

Finally, the Instinct 3 is the first smartwatch I’ve tested with a powerful LED flashlight built into the case, but now I wish every smartwatch had one.

The LED "torch" is so subtle, it’s easy to miss, that is, until you turn it on. At its top output, this small but mighty flashlight is powerful enough to light your way in utter darkness. It also has a strobe mode as well as a red light mode, useful when stargazing.

SMARTWATCHES

We're tracking all the best wearable tech deals

This weekend I ran my 7th marathon in Frankfurt, Germany, and, while worrying about the pouring rain and strong gusts of wind, I made things even more interesting by putting the Apple Watch Ultra 4 and Garmin Fenix 9 Pro head-to-head.

The Apple Watch Ultra 4 is Apple’s newest rugged sports watch, with a new heart rate monitor and a readiness score, helping you work out when to push yourself and when to recover. The Fenix 9 Pro, on the other hand, is Garmin’s most advanced sports watch yet. Both came out this year, and both offer all the sports modes and stats you need to track workouts, plus comprehensive daily activity and sleep tracking.

We’ve put all the features head-to-head in our Apple Watch Ultra 4 vs Garmin Fenix 9 Pro face-off here, but read on to see which came out on top on race day.

I wore the Apple Watch Ultra 4 and the Garmin Fenix 9 Pro for a marathon: Here’s what happened

Like most European marathons, the Frankfurt Marathon had a marker every kilometer, so for this test, I switched both watches from miles to kilometers. I manually lapped each watch every 5km, so I could be sure I was on pace, and when I finished running, I downloaded the data to see which watch was more accurate.

The GPS is notoriously unreliable in Frankfurt itself, especially around the business district, as, like most built-up cities, you’ve got buildings and skyscrapers to navigate. Chuck in crowds of people and 18,000 other runners, and things are never going to be 100% accurate, but I found immediately that the Garmin Fenix 9 Pro was far better at not letting these GPS dead zones give me inaccurate pace data.

You’ll never run 26.2 miles, or 42.19 kilometers on race day unless you’re perfectly sticking to the blue line, which it’s near impossible to do as you weave around other runners. My Garmin Fenix 9 Pro recorded the run as 42.76km, or 26.5 miles. The Apple Watch Ultra 4, on the other hand, recorded the run as 43.33km, or 26.9 miles. I found the Apple Watch Ultra 4 was about half a kilometer ahead of my Garmin throughout the race.

When it comes to my pacing, my bib, which recorded my pace at every kilometer marker, recorded my average pace as 4:52 min/km. The Garmin Fenix 9 Pro recorded an average pace of 4:48 km, and the Apple Watch Ultra 4 recorded 4:44 km. Of course, this accounts for the fact that the Apple Watch Ultra 4 recorded the longest run.

The main difference between the Apple Watch Ultra 3 and Apple Watch Ultra 4 is that the newer watch has Apple’s latest continuous heart rate monitor, which Apple says is the most accurate of any wearable device. During the run, the Apple Watch Ultra 4 recorded my average heart rate as 172 beats per minute, which is exactly the same as the Garmin Fenix 9 Pro. While I didn’t wear a chest strap, as there’s only so much tech a girl can wear on race day, I did have my Oura Ring 5 on my finger, which recorded my average heart rate as 179 beats per minute.

While both watches are more than capable of recording all of your training runs, as well as your recovery, on race day itself, the Garmin Fenix 9 Pro came out on top in terms of GPS accuracy. I also found it easier to use in the pouring rain, thanks to the extra buttons. Of course, this isn’t to say that the Apple Watch Ultra 4 is inaccurate, but on this particular wet Sunday morning, Garmin was the winner.

More from Tom's Guide

• Apple Watch Ultra 4 first impressions: 5 reasons to buy and 2 reasons to skip Apple’s new rugged model
• Apple Watch Ultra 4 vs Garmin Fenix 9 Pro: price, specs and features compared
• Here’s my favorite watchOS 27 upgrade — and it’s one nobody is really talking about

I just reviewed the Fitbit Edge, Google's long-awaited follow-up to 2023's Fitbit Charge 6, and it's better than its predecessor in nearly every single way, making it one of the best fitness trackers in 2026.

However, some folks seem particularly irked by Google's decision to nix the NFC antenna — found in the Charge 6 and used for contactless payments — from the Fitbit Edge. This is a criticism I don't agree with.

With that in mind, here are the three biggest reasons I'm genuinely glad Google didn't give the new Fitbit Edge NFC.

1. Google gave the Edge an altimeter instead

The main reason I'm glad Google nixed the NFC antenna on the Fitbit Edge is that the tech giant replaced it with something far more useful: a barometric altimeter for tracking elevation during outdoor workouts.

The Fitbit Charge 6 lacks this piece of tech, and as a result, it doesn't provide climb data, even for activities like bike rides and hikes.

More importantly, the Fitbit Edge has already proven to be an extremely reliable fitness tracker for logging uphill efforts based on test results from my Fitbit Edge review and an even more recent head-to-head comparison versus the Apple Watch 12 (which the Edge won).

2. Less than 1% of Fitbit Charge 6 users used NFC

Another reason I don't miss NFC on the Fitbit Edge — as recently confirmed via an email from Google — is the fact that less than 1% of Fitbit Charge 6 owners actually use NFC for contactless payments. So, for the Fitbit Edge, the brand instead "prioritized other top features such as adding an altimeter and requested improvements," according to that same email.

As noted in the Fitbit Edge conclusion of my review — written before receiving Google's note about Fitbit Charge 6 NFC usage — I suspected that most folks would rather have accurate elevation data for outdoor workouts than the ability to pay for their coffee from the wrist. And Google's note only confirms that hunch.

3. The lack of NFC keeps the cost of the Edge down

Finally, why pay more for features you're unlikely to use? After all, the $179 Fitbit Edge costs roughly the same as its three-year-old $159 predecessor when you account for inflation. Not only might adding NFC potentially increase the device's launch price, but it could also result in a larger case size, two things that would definitely detract from the Edge's overall appeal.

What are your thoughts on the Fitbit Edge? Do you agree with me that Google was wise to swap the NFC antenna for an altimeter? And which Google wearable would you be most likely to rock in 2026 and beyond? Let me know in the poll below.

More from Tom's Guide

• I walked 6,000 steps with the Fitbit Edge vs Apple Watch 12 — and I'm shocked by the results
• 3 reasons why the new Fitbit Edge beats the Fitbit Charge 6 — and 1 reason it doesn’t
• Google Fitbit Edge vs Fitbit Air: Which should you choose?

I walked exactly 6,094 steps wearing the Fitbit Edge on my left wrist and the Apple Watch Series 12 on my right wrist to find out which is the more accurate fitness tracker.

My 55-minute walk also included just under 500 feet of elevation gain with roughly three miles of ground covered. As a control, I separately logged my walk using the Strava app on my iPhone 16 Plus.

Find the results of my Fitbit Edge versus Apple Watch Series 12 head-to-head fitness tracking performance test below, along with the five biggest takeaways from the data.

Fitbit Edge vs. Apple Watch 12

But first, it's worth calling out key differences in terms of cost, features, and intended user between these two modern devices. For instance, when it comes to full-featured wearables, the Apple Watch 12 is one of the best smartwatches you can buy.

The Fitbit Edge, meanwhile, has essentially zero smart features, but is still among the best fitness trackers on the market because it offers reliable, distraction-free holistic insights. Cost-wise, the Fitbit Edge starts at $179, and the Apple Watch 12 starts at $399.

While the Apple Watch 12 is for iOS users only, the Fitbit Edge brings Google's best health and fitness features to both Android and iOS devices.

Ultimately, when it comes to onboard holistic and tracking tech, the two are fairly evenly matched: Both models have GPS, barometric altimeters, and continuous heart rate monitors.

With that out of the way, on to the test results!

I walked 6,000 steps with the Fitbit Edge vs Apple Watch 12

1. Fitbit's step count is closer to the control

I walked precisely 6,094 steps during my 55-minute outing, according to the control data logged by Strava, a tally that the Fitbit Edge came ridiculously close to matching.

In terms of accuracy in these comparisons, my rule of thumb is that any step count within 100 steps of the control is excellent and well within a reasonable margin of error. With that in mind, Apple and Fitbit each performed seriously well. But while Apple undercounted by only 41 steps, the Fitbit Edge came within 15 steps of my actual total.

2. But Apple's total distance is more accurate

On the flip side, when it came to correctly logging my total distance, the Apple Watch Series 12 proved more accurate than the Fitbit Edge, with a tally that's just 0.06 miles off from Strava's measure.

The Fitbit Edge didn't do too badly, though, coming within 0.13 miles of the control data, a result I still deem more than acceptable.

3. Fitbit's climb data is spot-on

I just published my Fitbit Edge review, and one of the upgrades I'm most excited for is the onboard barometric altimeter for precise elevation tracking. The Edge's predecessor, 2023's Fitbit Charge 6, lacked this important piece of tech. While some wearables try to roughly calculate climb using GPS data, the Charge 6 never did.

The upgrade definitely paid off, because the Fitbit Edge logs uphill efforts with impressive reliability. For this test, the Edge's climb data is within four feet of the control. The Apple Watch 12, meanwhile, proved a little more generous with its climb data, a trend I've noted several times before in similar head-to-heads.

4. Apple's average heart rate is slightly higher than expected

I'm not sure if the Apple Watch 12 wasn't worn tightly enough (or maybe too tightly), but the logged average heart rate of 133 bpm for this brisk yet not overly demanding walk is slightly higher than I expected, especially when compared to heart rate data from walks of similar effort (~120 bpm tends to be my average).

That said, the Fitbit Edge's average heart rate is slightly lower than anticipated, though the max pace is much more aligned with what I've come to expect from such a workout.

5. Apple's pace is closer to the control, but Fitbit wins overall

Finally, Apple's average pace data is much more closely aligned with Strava's. Fitbit's tally, meanwhile, I'd label as "slower than expected," especially given the fact that I was moving briskly and barely paused at any point during the walk.

That said, the Edge logged several additional minutes of workout time compared to Strava and Apple (it was the last device I ended my workout on), which might be the reason for the sluggishness.

Ultimately, pace aside, I'm calling the Fitbit Edge the winner for this head-to-head fitness tracking showdown versus the Apple Watch Series 12. Not only did the Edge log a more accurate step count, but it also beat Apple at logging my climb and heart rate (even if the Apple Watch was closer in terms of distance and pace).

Of course, I'd happily trust either device as my daily fitness tracker. Which begs the question: Which of these two 2026 wearables would you rather own? Let me know in the poll below.

More from Tom's Guide

• I walked 5,500 steps with the Apple Watch 12 vs Garmin Venu 4 — here's the winner
• Apple Watch Series 12 vs Apple Watch Ultra 4: Which new Apple Watch should you buy?
• I’ve tested over 100 fitness trackers head-to-head — 3 workout stats I trust the least

The Fitbit Charge 6 is one of the fitness trackers I've recommended the most over the past three years. Originally launched in 2023, a replacement has been long overdue, and for a while, I had my doubts we'd ever get one.

After all, when Google acquired Fitbit in 2021, it wasn't crystal clear what the tech giant's plans were for the brand. Would the Fitbit name live on, or would the best bits of Fitbit be chopped up for parts and fed to the more advanced Pixel Watch line?

Now we have our answer. The Fitbit line truly lives on with the launch of the 2026 Fitbit Edge, which I've been wearing for the past ten days.

A worthy replacement for the Fitbit Charge 6, the Fitbit Edge is better than its predecessor in nearly every way. Moreover, the Fitbit Edge feels like just the right amount of fitness tracker for most folks, which is why I highly recommend it.

Fitbit Edge: Specs compared

Fitbit Edge value: 4/5

• The Fitbit Edge costs roughly the same as its 2023 predecessor, accounting for inflation
• The optional Google Health Premium subscription is $9.99 a month or $99 a year and includes personalized AI-backed holistic trend reports, training tips, custom workout plans, and more

The Fitbit Edge is priced at $179 via Amazon and other major retailers, which is pretty close to the $159 launch price of its 2023 predecessor, accounting for inflation. It's also $79 more than the screen-free Fitbit Air, which also arrived this year.

Google offers the Fitbit Edge in an impressive range of case designs. Options include a Matte Black case with an Obsidian strap (shown here), a Satin Silver case with a "Fog" strap, a Satin Pyrite case with an Olive strap, a Champagne Gold case with a "Canyon" strap, and a Satin Pyrite case with a limited edition Stephen Curry band ($219).

There are also plenty of accessory straps in all styles and materials, including metal, silicone, and woven cloth to choose from for added personalization.

Fitbit Edge value: 4/5

Fitbit Edge design and display: 4.5/5

• Comfortable, highly customizable design with lots of strap options to choose from
• Aluminum case with 50 meters of water resistance
• Larger, brighter display than its predecessor, despite a similarly sized case design
• Google ditched the haptic button of the Fitbit Charge 6 for a more responsive physical button on the Fitbit Edge

The Fitbit Edge case is a tad larger and heavier than its predecessor to accommodate a bigger display. That said, the two feel pretty much indistinguishable once on the wrist.

Ultimately, I prefer the design of the newer model for one important reason. While both the Fitbit Charge 6 and Fitbit Edge feature solid-built aluminum cases, the Edge boasts a 1.34-inch AMOLED screen with 1,000 nits of max brightness, far roomier and easier to view in direct sunlight than the Charge 6's 1.04-inch touchscreen with roughly 450 nits of max brightness.

The Edge boasts a water resistance rating of 50 meters, the same as its predecessor and enough for surface-level swims, hand-washing, etc.

Just to be sure, I put the Fitbit Edge through our official Tom's Guide Smartwatch Waterproof Test (the name is a work in progress). In this very scientific assessment, the Edge spent 30 minutes submerged in one foot of water before I fished it out; the outcome: No damage to report.

In terms of controls, the Fitbit Charge 6 has a single haptic-style button on the side of the case that vibrates slightly when you press it. I've never been a huge fan, and I'm thankful that Google reverted to a physical, clickable button on the Edge's case.

Fitbit Edge design and display: 4.5/5

Fitbit Edge Health tracking: 4.5/5

• Detailed nightly sleep reports are on par with the best fitness trackers I've tested
• The Fitbit Edge supports Google's latest Health Guardian features, including breathing emergency alerts and loss of pulse detection
• The companion Google Health app is easy to navigate, with key vitals and metrics presented front and center, including your heart rate, HRV, breathing rate and quality, skin temperature, and blood oxygen saturation (SpO2)
• Some health tracking features require a Google Health Premium subscription, like insulin resistance and blood pressure trend reports

The Fitbit Edge is packed with all sorts of holistic tech to keep tabs on your heart health, sleep quality, body temperature fluctuations, breathing rate and quality, stress, women's health, and more.

I'm a particularly big fan of Google's detail-rich daily sleep reports, which include a numeric score out of 100 along with a rating, plus insights into time spent in various sleep stages, sleep interruptions, "sound sleep," and restlessness.

I also love Google's dynamic Readiness Score, also out of 100; it reflects how much effort you should put into physical fitness daily and is based on your resting heart rate, heart rate variability trends, and recent sleep quality. A low Readiness Score might also reflect an oncoming illness or general fatigue.

For example, my Readiness Score this morning was 65/100, which Google considers high. This means that I got solid recovery over the weekend, and I'm cleared for a hardcore workout this afternoon.

The Google Health app, which replaces the old Fitbit app, puts all your most important insights and metrics front and center on the main "Today" tab. That said, users can fully customize what appears. By default, the Today tab shows your current step count for the day, Readiness Score, sleep duration and score, and progress toward your weekly cardio goals.

Meanwhile, the Vitals tab is where you'll find your real-time cardiovascular insights beyond heart rate, including your heart rate variability (HRV), resting heart rate trends, blood oxygen saturation levels, and VO2 max, a measure of the maximum amount of oxygen your body uses during peak exercise.

The Edge also supports all of Google's Health Guardian features, like high and low heart rate alerts, breathing emergency alerts, and loss of pulse detection.

Finally, Google Health Premium subscribers get access to Google's new insulin resistance and blood pressure trend reports, something older Fitbit models don't support. The subscription also unlocks Google's AI-powered health concierge called "The Coach," which can help you set goals and better understand your real-time and long-term health data.

Fitbit Edge Health tracking: 4.5/5

Fitbit Edge fitness tracking: 4.5/5

• The Fitbit Edge has onboard GPS (unlike the Fitbit Air) and a barometric altimeter (unlike the Fitbit Charge 6) for precise location and elevation data
• The Fitbit Edge proved just as accurate at tracking a basic walking workout as an iPhone Series 12 or the Strava app on a smartphone
• 50+ common workout types are supported, but auto-workout detection isn't always reliable
• Highly-personalized training plans, recovery advice, and more are available via the Google Health Premium subscription; the Edge ships with a trial to try before you buy

The Fitbit Edge has one clear advantage over its predecessor when it comes to fitness tracking: the inclusion of a barometric altimeter. This handy piece of tech is used to precisely log changes in elevation when tracking an outdoor workout. Not only does the Charge 6 lack an altimeter, but it also doesn't even report climb data.

In terms of accuracy, I tested the Fitbit Edge's outdoor workout tracking performance against the Strava app running on my iPhone 16 Plus during a particularly hilly ~2.5-mile walk around Seattle, Washington. Check out the results below.

The Edge logged nearly the exact same number of steps taken during the workout, along with remarkably similar elevation gain data. Distance data aligns slightly less well; the same goes for pace. Then again, Strava almost always logs a quicker pace than other tracking methods I've tested.

I additionally tested the Fitbit Edge's fitness tracking accuracy head-to-head versus the Apple Watch 12 and Strava during a separate hilly, multi-mile walk. And again, the Edge impressed, besting the Apple Watch in step count and elevation accuracy, while coming close in distance. That said, the Edge's average pace for the workout was slower than expected, similar to the results above.

Beyond outdoor walks, the Fitbit Edge supports 50+ common workout types and can even auto-detect certain favorites, like runs and bike rides, with hit-or-miss reliability. I say that because you generally need to do one of these workouts for at least 15 straight minutes for the auto-detection to kick in.

This stipulation means that, as a newbie runner who tends to interval train with a mix of running and walking, I can't really rely on the Edge's auto-detection to log my training efforts.

Some of the Fitbit Edge's most impressive training tools and insights require a Google Health Premium subscription. Fortunately, the tracker ships with a three-month free trial.

Premium subscribers get personalized, adaptive training plans via Google's AI-powered "Coach," custom-tailored daily recommendations to build better workout and recovery habits, and access to Google's large library of fitness and mindfulness video content.

Fitbit Edge fitness tracking: 4.5/5

Fitbit Edge smart features: 2/5

• The Fitbit Edge isn't the wearable to get if you want smart features
• The Edge does support mirrored notifications and music control for paired Android and iOS devices
• Unlike the Fitbit Charge 6, the new Fitbit Edge lacks NFC for contactless payments

If you want smart features, the Fitbit Edge probably isn't the wearable for you. Instead, consider the Google Pixel Watch 5, one of the best smartwatches of 2026.

That said, the Fitbit Edge does work with both Android and iOS devices (unlike the Pixel Watch 5), with support for mirrored notifications and music/media control.

Unfortunately, unlike 2023's Fitbit Charge 6, the Fitbit Edge lacks onboard NFC for contactless payments.

Fitbit Edge smart features: 2/5

Fitbit Edge battery life: 4.5/5

• In my testing, the Edge surpassed its advertised battery life rating of seven days per charge
• That includes logging one ~45-minute workout per day during the test period
• The Fitbit Edge recharges from 0 to 100% in about 90 minutes, compared to a two-hour recharge time for the Fitbit Charge 6

Google rates the Fitbit Edge's battery life at seven days per charge with normal use, the same as its predecessor. However, in reality, the Fitbit Charge 6 lasts closer to five or six days per charge.

Fortunately, in my testing, the Fitbit Edge not only met the advertised rating, but surpassed it by a cool 24 hours. During the eight days of battery testing, the Edge rarely left my wrist, and I logged a roughly 45-minute outdoor workout using GPS each day of the test period.

The Fitbit Edge also recharges faster than its predecessor. Google claims a 90-minute recharge time from 0 to 100%. In my testing, it took the Edge roughly 90 minutes to go from 5% to 100%. By comparison, the Fitbit Charge 6 needs closer to two hours for a full recharge.

Fitbit Edge battery life: 4.5/5

Fitbit Edge review: Verdict

The Fitbit Edge is, in most regards, the perfect successor to the Fitbit Charge 6, with a bigger, brighter display, easier-to-use controls, more accurate elevation tracking, access to Google's latest/greatest health and safety features, and better battery performance, in an equally comfortable, similarly priced package.

Put another way, the Fitbit Edge offers nearly all of the best health and fitness features found in the latest Google Pixel Watch 5, for a fraction of the price (and in a smaller form factor).

But what about the lack of NFC for contactless payments? My theory — since confirmed by Google — is that the engineers needed to free up space for the barometric altimeter (used to track elevation), so they nixed the rarely-used NFC antenna, a tradeoff I fully support.

After all, as an amateur mountain adventurer (and someone who also likes to stroll in hilly environments), while paying for a coffee with my Fitbit sounds nice, accurate climb data is a whole lot nicer.

What are your thoughts on the new Fitbit Edge? Are you considering buying one? Do you have further questions based on my review? Let me know below.

Given the rocketing costs of top Garmin watches, the Garmin Enduro 4 is actually pretty good value at its launch price of $899, since it offers most of the key features of Garmin’s flagship Fenix 9 Pro and longer battery life.

However, the Garmin Enduro 3 is currently just $789 on Amazon, and that makes it even better value than the new Enduro 4, because Garmin has only made minimal updates to the watch and most of its new features will be rolling back to the Enduro 3.

What’s new on the Garmin Enduro 4?

I’ve just started testing the Garmin Enduro 4, and the most noticeable change so far is cosmetic; it has a silver bezel with fewer yellow marks than the Enduro 3.

It also comes with Garmin’s new ComfortFit band, which is absolutely lovely and more comfortable than the UltraFit band on the Enduro 3, but you can buy this ComfortFit band separately and strap it on the old watch.

The new watch also has more storage — 64GB vs 32GB — and a faster processor and more RAM for maps, which should load more quickly when panning and zooming.

You also get a new perspective view on the map with the new Enduro 4, which isn’t coming to the Enduro 4, and a new archery feature I can’t claim to have tested.

These are all the features that won’t come to the Enduro 3, but there are also a lot of updates on the Enduro 4 right now due to come to the Enduro 3 in time through software updates.

Some of the most notable features in this category are Garmin’s Epic feature, which bundles activities into one group so you can look at all your stats for a multi-day ultramarathon, for example, and the new stamina feature that launched with the Garmin Fenix 9 Pro.

The Garmin Enduro 3 is also a good Fenix alternative

Looking at that list, you can see the Enduro 4 is an iterative update aimed at people looking to upgrade from the Enduro 1 or 2 rather than the 3, which matches the new watch pretty closely in design and software.

I’d pick up the Enduro 3 in the sales myself, even if it might end up being phased out of software updates earlier than the Enduro 4 at some point in the future.

It’s not just the Enduro 4 that’s threatened by this deal on the Enduro 3, however, because I also think it’s a strong alternative to the Garmin Fenix 9 Pro.

The Fenix 9 Pro has an AMOLED option and extra features like LTE and satellite connectivity with a diveproof design and a mic and speaker, but the nuts and bolts of its sports tracking, training analysis and navigation features are the same as on the Enduro 3.

Furthermore, the Enduro 3 and its MIP display with solar charging offer longer battery life and a lighter design than the 51mm Fenix 9 Pro, which has a full titanium case.

At $789, the Enduro 3 is $110 cheaper than the Enduro 4, but a full $400-$500 cheaper than the 51mm Fenix 9 Pro. That’s a saving worth considering.

More from Tom's Guide

• I've been in a serious relationship with my vagus nerve stimulator for 30 days to see if it would decrease my stress — here's why I'm breaking up with it already
• I ran 40 miles in the Nike Pegasus Plus 2 and it’s worth the upgrade on the Pegasus 42
• I coach my 72-year-old dad like he's 30: here's the one exercise that moves the needle most for upper-body strength and mobility

A glance at the people around you on the train, walking down a busy street, or in the grocery store will tell you that the gym isn’t the only place people are wearing fitness trackers these days.

Devices like the Apple Watch Series 12, Oura Ring 4, or Whoop 5.0 have become more of a fashion accessory than strictly for tracking workouts. They’re a great way of tracking your training and seeing tangible evidence of your progress, but does everyone need one? I’m not so sure.

There’s a dark side to the tracking. Viewing burned calories so easily in an app can be an extremely triggering experience for some users, and it may even begin unhealthy habits like calorie counting and overexercising. So, let's go over the perks of these devices and discuss the science behind why they can also become harmful.

Fitness tracker or calorie counter

The majority of these smartwatches and smart rings track your health using metrics including sleep and activity. I’ve used these devices myself, and having a consistent way to make sure I’m getting enough rest as well as hitting my activity goals has been very helpful in my own fitness journey.

Recently, while testing these devices, I’ve noticed the introduction of calorie counting and ways to monitor food intake. This raises alarm bells for me, as while it’s important to track protein and nutrient intake for intense training, it’s not a feature every individual will need.

So now, with more people focusing on their food consumption alongside their training, could this lead to unhealthy eating habits taking hold? I spoke to leading sports dietician Renee McGregor to find out about the effect it may have.

She said, “A lot of these apps are built on the archaic equation and reduce a human to calories in versus calories out. Humans are much more complex than this, and so this setup often leads to underfuelling, especially in those individuals who are highly active.”

A healthy lifestyle or an obsession

Although there’s some inaccuracy, these activity and food tracking features are excellent if you want to track your weight loss. Having a visual measure of calories burned and/or the number of steps you’ve completed can be a good indicator to inform a calorie deficit.

But what about people who are struggling with eating disorders? Is this just another way to reinforce the resurgence of diet culture we’re seeing in the wider media?

For some people, seeing calories burned rise and calories consumed fall can become intoxicating. It won’t come as a surprise to you that right now we’re entering into a “skinny epidemic.”

This cultural term was popularized in the 2010s, marking a resurgence of the ‘90s diet culture that was coined as “heroin chic”. It’s a pendulum we see swing from celebrating larger bodies and then smaller bodies over time. It’s all directly impacted by the media we consume.

Wearables now come with software that can evaluate meals. Oura has Meals, and Garmin has its own nutrition tracking in the app. I asked Renee about how wearables could contribute to this, especially for people who have previously lived with eating disorders. She told me, “The main concern is that it keeps people ‘contained,’ and they don't rebuild the relationship with their bodies. Instead of listening and responding to their bodies, they follow an external cue which keeps them stuck. While they may believe it helps them to be ‘in control’ in reality, they are being controlled.”

The Alliance For Eating Disorders advises, “For individuals struggling with eating disorders, fitness trackers can act as a form of control, feeding into the disordered mindset that one’s worth is tied to their physical appearance, weight, and level of activity. The numbers on the screen can become a constant source of validation or anxiety. These numbers may be used to justify extreme exercise regimens or changes in eating behaviors.”

Where does AI come into this?

It’s not just companion apps for fitness trackers that are enabling these behaviours. People are taking pictures of their food and uploading them to AI chatbots, like ChatGPT, and asking how many calories are in their food. This can be damaging and lead to fueling the body improperly, meaning cutting down on more calories than you need.

Renee says using AI this way is highly inaccurate. “It’s only as good as the information that has actually been put into these AI apps. The other key problem is that not all calories are equal… a calorie is an arbitrary unit of energy.

“It’s based on the energy yielded when you burn a food in a calorimeter. Humans are not calorimeters. So while a calorimeter may say a carrot provides 10 calories, a human cannot absorb all of those calories because most of it is indigestible due to the high fibre content.”

This means that when we’re told something is X calories, we’re not actually taking all of that in. So if we burn more to remain in a deficit for weight loss, it could be more dramatic than intended.

With all of this said, wearable technology can also aid in food and exercise tracking when done properly. Renee says, “In the same way that tracking food and exercise can be problematic, if done in the right way — maybe by ensuring an appropriate app or working alongside a coach — the data being collected can provide key information to demonstrate that you may be lacking sufficient recovery or not fuelling appropriately, particularly carbohydrates, which are the most important macros required for optimal health and performance.”

So, how did we get to a point where we need a wearable to tell us what to eat? The only way to get reliable nutritional information tailored to you is by talking to a nutritionist or reaching out to a medical professional.

More from Tom's Guide

• I paired my Oura Ring 5 with the Hatch Sleep Clock to track my nights for 2 months — here's why it's become the ultimate combination
• I stopped ants from taking over my countertop by removing this one kitchen item
• 5 kitchen cleaning shortcuts that do the hard work for you

I’ve had an Apple Watch on my wrist for most of a decade, and one thing Apple does really well is roll out updates that improve the day-to-day experience of wearing the watch. I’ve been using watchOS 27 for the past few weeks, and my favorite feature is one nobody is really talking about — read on to find out more.

To get the new features on your watch, make sure you’ve updated to watchOS 27. To do this, install iOS 27 on your iPhone, then download the new WatchOS to your phone, or directly onto the watch by going to General, then Software Update.

My favorite new watchOS 27 feature

WatchOS 27 brings some new features to your Apple Watch, including Siri AI, which allows you to ask Siri questions or tell it to perform simple tasks on the Watch, like setting a timer or starting a workout. This new version is much more capable than its predecessor.

Yet, in my opinion, the best feature is the change to the dynamic app grid, which now shows your most recent apps at a glance. Apple hasn’t reinvented the wheel here, but it really is a game-changer — gone are the struggles of finding the app you need on the Apple Watch home screen grid, or scrolling through a long alphabetical list.

The dynamic app grid now shows only your five most frequently used or recently used apps, with a Siri icon in the center. Press the Digital Crown to open this grid. You can still tap the home screen to see the full list of your apps, and swipe down to return to the dynamic app grid.

This change confused me for a couple of days, but after living with it for a month, I can’t believe how much faster it made navigating my watch. I’d still really love to be able to customize the apps you can see on this grid, similar to the Smart Stack, but for now, this is definitely a watchOS 27 upgrade I’m using every day.

Talking of Smart Stack, Apple has also tweaked this slightly with watchOS 27. Apple added the ability to open the Smart Stack by double-tapping your thumb and index finger with last year’s watchOS 26, but with watchOS 27, things go a little further. You can still double-tap your fingers to open the Smart Stack and scroll down to the next widget in the stack. Once you find the widget you want, however, you can now tap once to open the widget.

More from Tom's Guide

• I just installed watchOS 27 and instantly regretted it — here’s why
• Apple Watch Ultra 4 review: I ran 22 miles to test Apple’s ultimate adventure watch
• Apple Watch Ultra 4 vs Garmin Fenix 9 Pro: price, specs and features compared

I'm reviewing the new Fitbit Edge, Google's follow-up to the 2023 Fitbit Charge 6, one of the best fitness trackers we've tested.

In terms of upgrades, the Edge has a lot going for it, including several important new health and safety features, welcomed design improvements, and enhanced outdoor tracking capabilities.

It's not all lollipops and ice cream, though. The Fitbit Edge comes up short in one key area versus the Fitbit Charge 6; read on to find out which one that is. But first, here are the three biggest reasons why the Fitbit Edge beats the Fitbit Charge 6.

1. A bigger, better screen

The Fitbit Charge 6's 1.04-inch AMOLED touchscreen isn't the smallest I've encountered on a modern fitness tracker, but it's far from the biggest. Translation: interacting with it can be a tad fumbly for those with big fingers, and squint-inducing for farsighted folks.

This is much less the case with the Fitbit Edge, which features a noticeably roomier 1.34-inch AMOLED screen. Roughly twice the maximum brightness output means the Fitbit Edge is also easier to read than the Fitbit Charge 6 in direct sunlight.

2. More advanced health features

Both the 2023 Fitbit Charge 6 and 2026 Fitbit Edge work with Google's recently overhauled Google Health app, which replaces the old Fitbit app. Regardless of which tracker you wear, you'll be greeted with daily insights into your sleep quality, energy levels, heart rate, blood oxygen saturation (SpO2), body temperature trends, and more.

You can also perform ECG readings using either Fitbit, but only the Fitbit Edge supports Google's new insulin resistance and blood pressure trend reports. The Edge additionally has important health safety tools absent from the Charge 6, including Loss of Pulse Detection and Breathing Emergency Alerts.

3. Onboard altimeter for elevation tracking

As a lover of outdoor mountain adventures, including hiking, skiing, snowmobiling, and more, I'm thrilled that Google added a barometric altimeter to the Fitbit Edge, something that was noticeably lacking in the Fitbit Charge 6.

While some fitness trackers without onboard altimeters try to guess elevation gain using GPS insights, this method is far from precise, which is probably why the Fitbit Charge 6 doesn't bother to share the metric at all.

Thankfully, the Fitbit Edge does, but how accurate is the new model's elevation tracking performance? You'll have to wait a few more days until I publish the full review to find out!

But only the Fitbit Charge 6 has NFC

While the new Fitbit Edge handily beats its predecessor when it comes to health and fitness tracking chops as well as overall usability and design, the newer model omits one key piece of tech: NFC for contactless payments.

It's ultimately a bit ironic that the 2023 model supports tap-to-pay but the 2026 model doesn't. On the flip side, perhaps Google needed to nix something from the design to make room for the altimeter. If that's the case, I gladly take precise elevation tracking over the ability to pay for things from the wrist.

What are your thoughts on the Fitbit Edge vs. Fitbit Charge 6? Let me know below.

More from Tom's Guide

• Fitbit Edge first impressions: 5 reasons to buy (and 2 reasons to skip) Google's new fitness tracker
• Google Fitbit Edge vs Fitbit Air: Which should you choose?
• Exclusive: Inside the Pixel Watch 5's breathing emergency detection — and why it's like an 'airbag on your wrist'

The Coros Pace 4 Pro is one of the best sports watches to come out this year, and I’ve kept it on since testing it for my review to use as my main running watch during marathon training.

It’s a key competitor to Garmin’s Forerunner line-up, and the Garmin Forerunner 570 in particular, which lacks a key feature the Pace 4 Pro has in the shape of offline maps.

However, the Forerunner 570 does outshine the cheaper Coros in some areas, most notably smart features and training analysis, and it comes in two sizes.

I’ve run hundreds of miles with both watches individually in testing, and also wore them both for a run to test them head-to-head.

I’ve outlined the key differences to consider below, and for more details on either, check our Coros Pace 4 Pro review and Garmin Forerunner 570 review.

Garmin Forerunner 570 vs Coros Pace 4 Pro: price

The Coros Pace 4 Pro is the cheaper watch, costing $449/£389 compared to $549.99/£459.99 for the Forerunner 570. That’s at full price, but it’s worth noting the Forerunner 570 is reduced quite regularly to $449, the same price as the Coros.

Right now, the Pace 4 Pro only comes in one size with two colors: black and white. The Forerunner 570 comes in two sizes — 42mm and 47mm — with three colors available in each size.

Garmin Forerunner 570 vs Coros Pace 4 Pro: design and display

The Forerunner 570 has some design advantages purely in terms of the choice on offer — there are brighter colors available and having the smaller size option is great for those with smaller wrists.

I also slightly prefer the five-button design on the Garmin to the three buttons on the Coros, one of which is a digital dial, just because I sometimes set off the dial accidentally and find it less precise than buttons.

Both are attractive watches with bright AMOLED displays, but the Coros has a larger screen at 1.47 in to 1.4 in on the 47mm Forerunner 570 I tested (1.2 in on the 42mm watch), and it also uses more durable materials.

The Pace 4 Pro has a titanium bezel and sapphire crystal screen, whereas the Forerunner 570 has a Gorilla Glass screen and aluminum bezel. The sapphire crystal display in particular is a bonus for me as someone who has scratched glass screens in the past on runs.

Both 47mm watches feel light on the wrist, with the Coros being a little thinner, but the Garmin a little lighter. I found both comfortable to wear 24/7.

You get more storage on the Pace 4 Pro, which has 32GB of space compared with 8GB on the Garmin, which makes room for the maps you can download to the Coros.

Neither watch has a built-in flashlight, which is surprising for the Forerunner 570 since it’s a feature that is found on many Garmins, including the Venu 4 at the same price.

Garmin Forerunner 570 vs Coros Pace 4 Pro: sports tracking and training analysis

Both watches offer a wide array of sports modes, including track run, triathlon and open water swimming, with lots of stats available for the main sports of running, cycling and swimming in particular.

Though it doesn’t have all the training analysis features found on pricier Garmins, the Forerunner 570 does offer more features in this area than the Coros Pace 4 Pro.

One notable extra is Garmin’s Training Readiness rating, which condenses a lot of the data it tracks into one score you can use to guide your approach to training on any given day.

I also think Garmin does a better job of showing its training analysis in an engaging and easy-to-understand way.

The Coros does offer a good level of insight into your training, though, including info on your overall training load, VO2 max estimates, race predictions, and a recovery advisor. I don’t think the Pace 4 Pro is lacking in this area, but the Garmin does offer more.

Garmin Forerunner 570 vs Coros Pace 4 Pro: GPS and heart rate accuracy

Throughout testing, I kept constant tabs on the GPS accuracy of the watches by checking their tracks and looking at the pacing and distance stats in comparison to other top watches.

I also raced with both to see if they lined up with the official race distances, and both have been excellent for me with regard to GPS accuracy. I used the most accurate multi-band mode in both watches and haven’t experienced any noticeable errors with either.

To check their heart rate accuracy, I compared them with the readings from a chest strap sensor for a variety of workouts.

Both impressed again, but the odd error did creep in, I’d say more noticeably with the Coros Pace 4 Pro, which would show the occasional incorrect spike in heart rate and lag behind the chest strap more noticeably during interval sessions.

I’d call it a draw on GPS accuracy and give the Garmin an edge on heart rate accuracy, but both are very strong in both areas based on my testing.

Garmin Forerunner 570 vs Coros Pace 4 Pro: smart features

One area where the Forerunner 570 easily beats the Coros Pace 4 Pro is smart features.

The best Garmin watches in general are way ahead of their sporty rivals on this front, offering NFC payments, music storage including being able to link with streaming services like Spotify, and the Connect IQ app store, which does contain useful extras for the watch.

You also get more smart widgets on the Forerunner 570, like a calendar app and sports scores, and you can customize the watch face a lot more than on the Coros.

While the Pace 4 Pro does offer music storage, it can’t link with streaming apps, so you have to drag and drop MP3 files onto the watch, and it doesn’t offer NFC payments or an app store, beyond being able to send new watch faces from the app.

Garmin Forerunner 570 vs Coros Pace 4 Pro: maps and navigation

Garmin has the best maps and navigation tools available for sports watches, but only on its top-end devices, and the Forerunner 570 only offers breadcrumb navigation.

The Coros Pace 4 Pro has full offline maps, making navigation easier, especially when following routes on the watch, and it also delivers alerts when notable climbs and descents are coming up on your route.

Breadcrumb navigation is fine most of the time, but the maps on the Pace 4 Pro are a clear advantage over the Forerunner 570.

Garmin Forerunner 570 vs Coros Pace 4 Pro: battery life

Battery life is an area where Coros always shines, and the Pace 4 Pro easily outlasts the Forerunner 570 in both watch and GPS modes.

The 47mm Forerunner 570 lasts up to 11 days in watch mode and offers 14 hours of multi-band GPS tracking, whereas the Pace 4 Pro can last up to 21 days in watch mode and has 30 hours of multi-band GPS.

In my testing, I had the screen always on with both watches, which reduces battery life, and ran every day using the GPS, and the Forerunner 570 needed charging every three to four days, whereas the Coros lasted me seven days on a charge.

Garmin Forerunner 570 vs Coros Pace 4 Pro: specs compared

Garmin Forerunner 570 vs Coros Pace 4 Pro: verdict

The Garmin Forerunner 570 is a great sports watch, but given its high price, it’s definitely a shame Garmin left out some key features, including maps and a flashlight.

Unless you really need the smart features on the watch, or love its design and smaller size option, the Coros Pace 4 Pro is the better buy in my opinion.

It’s cheaper, lasts longer on a charge, has maps and a bigger display, and has proved to be reliably accurate and enjoyable to wear 24/7 in my experience.

More from Tom's Guide

• If you enjoy lifting weights — these are the only 3 gym shoes I'd wear, and they're up to 30% off in Prime Day sales
• I’ve tested the Hoka Clifton 11 vs Hoka Bondi 9 and this is the one I’d buy
• My favorite trail-running shoe is 34% off for Prime Day, and it’s great for hiking too

The Apple Watch finally has a dynamic Readiness Score. Based on a scale from zero to ten, the score takes into account your recent sleep quality, physical activity, and vital trends.

Unlocking your dynamic Readiness Score on Apple Watch is fairly straightforward, though you will need to wear the device for seven nights to see your first one.

Apple's Readiness Score is just one of the cool, new features found in the best Apple Watch models in 2026. Others include support for a vastly improved AI-powered Siri, real-time dynamic step count data, an impressively comprehensive at-home wellness assessment, and Live Rewind, an AI tool that transcribes live audio around you.

Of course, I've already covered all of the above at length; here's how to unlock Apple's new dynamic Readiness Score on your Apple Watch in four easy steps.

How to unlock the Readiness Score on your Apple Watch

1. Make sure you have a compatible Apple Watch model
2. Enter your height, weight, and age in the Apple Fitness app
3. Wear your Apple Watch to bed for seven consecutive nights; ensure you get at least four hours of sleep per night
4. After seven nights logged, open the Readiness app on your Apple Watch to see your dynamic score

Read on to see full illustrated instructions for each step.

Readiness Scores break down into four categories: "Recover" (0-1), "Pace Yourself" (2-4), "Ready" (5-7), and "Go for it" (8-10).

Keep in mind, after your initial Readiness Score is generated, it will dynamically update throughout the day as you go about your business. Workouts, movement, naps, and heart rate can all have an impact on your real-time score.

And for easy viewing, there's even a Readiness Score widget you can add to your watch's home screen, right alongside the new Siri AI and dynamic step count widgets.

More from Tom's Guide

• I walked 5,000 steps with the Apple Watch 12 vs Garmin Forerunner 170 — here's the winner
• I tested the Apple Watch 12’s heart rate accuracy vs a chest strap for running, cycling, HIIT and strength workouts — here's my verdict
• Apple Watch Series 12 vs Apple Watch Ultra 4: Which new Apple Watch should you buy?

The Pebble Time 2 doesn’t take itself too seriously, which is exactly why it's one of the most enjoyable smartwatches I’ve ever tested. Supported by an open-source community of developers and wearable tech enthusiasts, this $225 device is pretty much the antithesis of an Apple Watch. And that's a good thing.

I just got my hands on the Pebble Time 2, and after a quick and easy setup — it works with both Android and iOS devices — I became immersed in Pebble's vast library of (mostly) free watch faces, apps, and even games.

Stay tuned for a full review, but in the meantime, here are the five most important things you should know about the Pebble Time 2 smartwatch.

1. Retro design + e-paper display

The Pebble Time 2 features a rectangular-shaped stainless steel and plastic case that very much reminds me of my favorite digital watches from the late 1980s and early 1990s, including the legendary Casio F-91W shown above.

Rather than a power-hungry AMOLED screen, the Pebble Time 2 has a 1.5-inch, 64-color e-paper touchscreen that's always-on and surprisingly easy to read in direct sunlight. That said, in some lighting conditions, it can appear a tad dull or faded.

The case has three physical buttons on the right side and a single "back" button on the left side. They all have ample gnarling, and overall, the Pebble Time 2 feels well-made. Gorilla Glass protects the display; however, because the glass is raised beyond the bezel, I worry about scratches in the long term.

2. Open-source, highly customizable OS

The Pebble Time 2 is ridiculously customizable. For example, users can assign pretty much any action to a long press on the button of their choice. And even though PebbleOS lacks the flashy animations and overall pizzazz of more mainstream smartwatch operating systems like the latest watchOS and Wear OS, it's still quite easy to navigate and personalize.

There are presently more than 10,000 watch faces, apps, and games to choose from in the Pebble store, many of which are free. My first order of action upon completing the setup was to install a Super Mario-like watch face, where the character jumps every time the minute changes.

As a bonus, apps and watch faces take a negligible amount of time to download and install.

3. Insane battery

Since the Pebble Time 2 lacks power-hungry components like a bright AMOLED screen, GPS, or cellular antenna, battery life is seriously impressive. According to Pebble, users can expect up to 30 days per charge. Just think: that's 30x better battery performance than the Apple Watch Series 12, one of the best full-featured smartwatches in 2026.

4. Entry-level fitness tracking

The Pebble Time 2 is not designed to be a fitness or health tracker, but it does offer some basic holistic tech and features on par with a very entry-level tracker. These include a continuous heart rate sensor, an accelerometer for logging daily step counts and workouts, and insights into sleep duration and light vs. deep sleep.

5. Free games galore

While fitness features may be light, I'm seriously blown away by the number of free, genuinely fun games you can play on the Pebble Time 2. So far, "Turbo Drift," a game that reminds me of the 1980s Sega classic "Out Run," has been my go-to. Some others I'm looking forward to trying, based on positive reviews, include "Pixel Miner," "Strike Force," and "Rock Crusher."

As noted in the intro, I'm in the process of fully testing the Pebble Time 2, so stay tuned for my full review. For now, what are your thoughts on the new Pebble Time 2 smartwatch, and what should I test? Also, are you excited to see the return of the Pebble brand, and do you plan on buying one for yourself? Let me know in the comments below.

More from Tom's Guide

• Pebble founder on why he's bringing Pebble watch back — 'Samsung, Google, Apple don't take any risks'
• Pebble is back with two new smartwatches starting at $149 — how to preorder
• The new Pebble smart ring has a built-in mic and costs just $75 — here’s why I can’t wait to try one

The Fitbit Inspire 3 is Google's four-year-old, entry-level fitness tracker. Originally priced at $99, you can easily pick one up on sale for much less... but should you, especially when newer models like the Fitbit Edge exist?

Howdy, I'm Dan, and I lead our wearable tech coverage at Tom's Guide. Not only am I in the process of reviewing the new Fitbit Edge — which seems potentially destined for our best fitness tracker list — but I'm also a long-time owner of the Fitbit Inspire 3. This is to say, I know both wearables reasonably well.

So how do they stack up? Here's a breakdown of the Fitbit Edge vs. Fitbit Inspire 3 across six categories, including price, design, display, health and fitness, smart features, and battery life.

Fitbit Edge vs. Fitbit Inspire 3: Cost

Even at full price, the Fitbit Inspire 3 is a bargain compared to the Fitbit Edge. Of course, since it's also four years old, you're unlikely to pay anywhere near the $99 launch price. For instance, the Fitbit Inspire 3 is just $88 on Amazon right now.

The Fitbit Edge, meanwhile, is a brand new fitness tracker for 2026 and still in the preorder phase of its launch. With units expected to ship at the end of October, the Fitbit will run you $179 at Amazon and at other major retailers.

Winner: Fitbit Inspire 3

Fitbit Edge vs. Fitbit Inspire 3: Design

The Fitbit Edge and Fitbit Inspire 3 look surprisingly similar; the cases are almost identical in height and thickness, though the Edge is taller. The newer model is also nearly double the weight of the Inspire 3. However, it by no means feels bulky or uncomfortable on the wrist (I've been wearing one for nearly a week).

In addition to touch displays — more on that below — each tracker has a single button on the side of the case for navigation. Similar to 2023's Fitbit Charge 6, the Fitbit Inspire 3 sports a haptic button that vibrates slightly (sometimes) when you press it. I'm not a huge fan of this type of control, and much prefer the Fitbit Edge's physical button with actual tactile feedback.

Material-wise, the Fitbit Inspire 3 case is primarily plastic, while the Edge case is recycled aluminum and plastic. Both have 50 meters of water resistance, enough protection for showers and surface-level swims.

Winner: Fitbit Edge

Fitbit Edge vs. Fitbit Inspire 3: Display

The Fitbit Inspire 3 has a modest 0.76-inch AMOLED screen that's decently bright and well-saturated, though the touch functionality can occasionally feel clunky/unresponsive. By comparison, the Fitbit Edge offers far more screen real estate, despite a somewhat similarly-sized case.

The Edge's 1.34-inch display is crisp, easy-to-read, and responsive. With greater maximum output than its predecessor, the Edge's screen is bright enough to view in direct sunlight without straining your eyes.

Winner: Fitbit Edge

Fitbit Edge vs. Fitbit Inspire 3: Specs compared

Fitbit Edge vs. Fitbit Inspire 3: Health and fitness

The Fitbit Inspire 3 is a four-year-old entry-level fitness tracker, and even though it covers the basics well, like logging common workouts, daily movement, sleep quality, and overall health, it lacks many of Google's latest and greatest holistic tools.

These include the new insulin resistance and blood pressure trend reports, breathing emergency alerts, and loss of pulse detection. The Inspire 3 additionally lacks the hardware to perform ECG readings. On the flip side, the Edge supports all of these features, and more.

The Inspire 3 also lacks onboard GPS and an altimeter, so users have to carry a paired smartphone for accurate location- and elevation-based metrics when logging an outdoor workout like a run, hike, or bike ride. The Fitbit Edge, meanwhile, has both.

Finally, the Edge supports a ton of additional AI-powered health features courtesy of the Google Health Premium (formerly Fitbit Premium) subscription, which is $9.99 a month or $99 a year. These include personalized training plans, nutrition insights, and even deeper dives into sleep and workout recovery.

Winner: Fitbit Edge

Fitbit Edge vs. Fitbit Inspire 3: Smart features

Both the Fitbit Edge and four-year-old Fitbit Inspire 3 work with Android and iOS, with the ability to mirror notifications and control media playback. But that pretty much rounds out the list of smart features on either.

Sadly, unlike the Edge's predecessor, the Fitbit Charge 6, the newer model lacks NFC for contactless payments. That said, it does play nicely with some other Google apps. For example, the Edge will display Google Maps turn-by-turn directions when using the app on your paired smartphone.

Winner: draw

Fitbit Edge vs. Fitbit Inspire 3: Battery life

Google says that the Fitbit Inspire 3 should last up to ten days per charge, and the Fitbit Edge should cruise for up to seven days. In reality, the Fitbit Inspire 3 averages closer to seven or eight days per charge, assuming you're recording one ~45-minute workout a day.

I'm still testing the Fitbit Edge, but if battery performance is anything like the Fitbit Charge 6 — which is also rated at seven days per charge — I expect the Edge to last a little closer to five or six days.

That said, one clear advantage the newer model has is a faster recharge time: 90 minutes for the Fitbit Edge compared to two hours for the Fitbit Inspire 3 (and Fitbit Charge 6).

Winner: Fitbit Inspire 3

Fitbit Edge vs. Fitbit Inspire 3: Outlook

Ultimately, while the Fitbit Inspire 3 remains a fairly competent budget fitness tracker in 2026 for keeping tabs on basic workouts, well-being, and sleep quality, the Fitbit Edge is in numerous ways a more capable device in a similar-sized package with a bigger screen and better overall usability.

But if you're still not sold on the Fitbit Edge over the Fitbit Inspire 3, I reccomend taking a look at my Fitbit Air vs Fitbit Inspire 3 comparison. Not only does the Fitbit Air support a lot of the same groundbreaking Google health features as the Edge, but it's also just $99 and even smaller/lighter than the Inspire 3 (though it lacks a screen)

Overall winner: Fitbit Edge

More from Tom's Guide

• Fitbit Edge vs Fitbit Air: Which should you choose?
• Fitbit Edge vs Fitbit Charge 6 — which Google fitness tracker wins?
• Fitbit Air vs Fitbit Charge 6 — which top-performing Fitness tracker wins?

The new Fitbit Edge is a follow-up to 2023’s Fitbit Charge 6, one of my favorite wearables and one of the best fitness trackers of all time. But is the Edge actually a worthy successor?

I’ve been wearing the Fitbit Edge for just over 24 hours, and three things are immediately clear. While I’ll save my hardcore test results and comparisons to the competition for the forthcoming review, here’s why the Fitbit Edge already has me impressed.

1. It borrows the Pixel Watch 5’s best health features

Google's Pixel Watch 5 is one of the best smartwatches for health and safety features thanks to groundbreaking tools like Loss of Pulse Detection, Breathing Emergency Alerts, and monthly insulin resistance/blood pressure trend reports.

Fortunately, you don't need to spend $399+ to unlock them. The new Fitbit Edge offers all these same features in a smaller, lighter, and perhaps most importantly, more wallet-friendly $179 package.

These features are in addition to other essentials, like continuous heart rate and body temperature monitoring, dynamic sleep and readiness scores, blood oxygen saturation (SpO2) and ECG readings, heart rate variability insights, and breathing rate/quality tracking.

The Edge also supports Google's AI-powered Health Coach for personalized training plans, nutrition insights, and deeper dives into sleep and workout recovery. It's part of the brand's Google Health Premium subscription, which will run $9.99 a month or $99 for the year.

Not sure if Google Health Premium is worth it for you? The Fitbit Edge comes with a three-month free trial, so you can try before you buy.

2. It’s just as comfy as its predecessor, dimensions be damned

Sometimes, specs can be deceiving. For example, on paper, the Fitbit Edge is taller, wider, thicker, and even a bit heavier than the Fitbit Charge 6. But on the wrist, you'd be hard-pressed to tell.

Despite a slight increase in case real estate, the Fitbit Edge is incredibly comfortable, just like its predecessor, and this is coming from a guy who strongly dislikes wearing any wrist-based wearable to bed. (Thank goodness for the best smart rings)!

There's also a good reason for the bigger case: the Fitbit Edge sports a 1.34-inch AMOLED screen, which is noticeably roomier and easier to interact with than the 1.04-inch display on the Charge 6.

3. Physical buttons > haptic buttons

While the Fitbit Charge 6 is one of my fitness trackers of the past three years, there's one design element I still loathe: the haptic button on the side of the case that vibrates (sometimes) when you press it.

Clearly, I'm not the only one who's anti-haptics, because Google ditched it for a proper clickable physical button on the Fitbit Edge, a small but meaningful user interface improvement I'm thrilled to see.

What are your thoughts on the new Fitbit Edge? Do you think it's a worthy replacement for the Fitbit Charge 6? Let me know below.

More from Tom's Guide

• Fitbit Edge first impressions: 5 reasons to buy (and 2 reasons to skip) Google's new fitness tracker
• Google Fitbit Edge vs Fitbit Air: Which should you choose?
• Exclusive: Inside the Pixel Watch 5's breathing emergency detection — and why it's like an 'airbag on your wrist'

If you’re looking for a smartwatch that’ll double up as a sports watch for your next race, you’re probably choosing between the Apple Watch Ultra 4 and the Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2. We’ve reviewed both on Tom’s Guide, but to find out more, I strapped both to my wrist and ran a half marathon — read on to see which came out on top.

When deciding between the two, note that the Apple Watch Ultra 4 requires an iPhone, while the Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 works only with Android or Galaxy.

Both have a large case — 49mm for the Apple Watch Ultra 4 and 47mm for the Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2. Both have built-in GPS and track your sleep, stress, workouts, recovery, and more. The Apple Watch Ultra 4 costs $799, whereas the Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 is $699. But which is most accurate? Let’s find out.

I ran a half marathon with the Apple Watch Ultra 4 and Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2: Here’s which came out on top

GPS

Let’s start with the basics — if you’re wearing a watch to track a race, you want it to track your GPS pretty perfectly. When putting both devices side by side, the GPS is pretty much spot on for both, and this shows when comparing the recordings to the actual map of the course.

With both watches, I had auto-lap set up, and both were pretty much hitting the distance markers at the right point. Of course, both watches recorded a slightly longer distance than the actual race itself, but this accounts for weaving runners and not ever really being able to stick to the race line. The Apple Watch Ultra 4 recorded the run as 13.23 miles; the Samsung Galaxy Watch 2 recorded it as 13.21 miles.

Heart rate

I didn’t wear a chest strap with the two watches, so I’ll use my Oura Ring 5 as my baseline. According to my Oura Ring 5, my average heart rate was 163 beats per minute, with most of my time spent in zones 4 and 5, showing I was pushing myself throughout the run.

The heart rate graphs on the Apple Watch Ultra 4 and Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 also look pretty similar, with my average heart rate on my Apple Watch recorded as 159 beats per minute and my Galaxy Watch recorded as 160 beats per minute.

Again, this one is pretty much too close to call.

Elevation

One thing that my colleague, Dan Bracaglia, found when testing the Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 was that the elevation gain seemed inaccurate during his runs and rides. I didn’t find the same — the official course route has a total elevation gain of 311 feet, and my watch recorded the run as 342 feet. Similar to GPS, a small difference is often down to altimeter sensitivity, GPS drift, or weaving through runners on the course.

Comfort and usability

I’m a pretty petite runner, and both watches felt pretty chunky on the wrist. Design-wise, the Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 felt a little wider, but it doesn’t have much in it.

Both have those all-important physical buttons that make using the watch with sweaty fingers a little bit easier, and both have bright, beautiful screens that were easy to see, even in direct sunlight. You do see slightly more on the screen of the Apple Watch Ultra 4, which is bigger, but again, there’s not a lot in it.

Which should you buy?

The answer really depends on whether you’re team iOS or Android. If you have an iPhone, don’t buy the Galaxy Watch Ultra 2, as it won’t work with your phone. Both are like having an extension of your phone on your wrist, with tonnes of apps at your fingertips.

Both did a stellar job of recording my half marathon, and both are probably the top contenders if you want a smartwatch with the capabilities (but sadly not the battery life) of a sports watch.

Follow Tom's Guide fitness on Instagram for more workouts, routines, tips, and tricks.

More from Tom's Guide

• I trekked the Cascade Mountains with the Apple Watch Ultra 3 vs Garmin Instinct 3 vs Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 — this is the one I'd take on my next hike
• Garmin Cirqa vs Fitbit Air vs Whoop vs Oura Ring: Our fitness experts are helping you pick the perfect fitness tracker
• I walked 4,000 steps with the Apple Watch Ultra 3 vs Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 — and the winning margin was razor-thin

Fitbit Edge or Fitbit Charge 6: which fitness tracker should you buy? While the choice may seem obvious to go with the newer model, several key factors may make the older option the better choice for you.

After all, the Fitbit Charge 6 is arguably one of the best fitness trackers ever made. How much better could the newer model be? We've barely gotten acquainted with the Fitbit Edge, but there's a lot to like, including support for Google's latest health and safety features and a comfortable, familiar design. Translation: It might well nab its predecessor's "best ever" crown.

To better understand the key differences between 2023's Fitbit Charge 6 and 2026's Fitbit Edge, here's a head-to-head breakdown of price, design, display, health and fitness, smart features, and battery life.

Fitbit Edge vs. Fitbit Charge 6: Cost

The Fitbit Edge costs $179 via Amazon and other major retailers, just $20 more than the Fitbit Charge 6's $159 launch price. For what it's worth, $159 in 2023, adjusted for inflation in 2026, is roughly $176.

Of course, you're unlikely to pay $159 for the Fitbit Charge 6 in 2026, especially with the arrival of its replacement. For example, you can buy the Charge 6 right now for just $124 at Walmart. Note: The Fitbit Edge is still in preorder, with units expected to ship at the end of October.

Winner: Fitbit Charge 6

Fitbit Edge vs. Fitbit Charge 6: Design

The Fitbit Charge 6 case weighs 15 g, compared to 17.7 g for the Fitbit Edge case. The newer model is also a bit larger and thicker than its predecessor (see exact dimensions in the table above).

Both devices sport a single button on the side of the case; however, they were not created equally. The Fitbit Charge 6 has a haptic button that vibrates when pressed, while the Fitbit Edge has a physical, clickable button, which I much prefer.

Ultimately, while the Fitbit Edge has more presence on the wrist than the Fitbit Charge 6, it still feels comfortable and uncumbersome. As a result, this one is a draw.

Winner: draw

Fitbit Edge vs. Fitbit Charge 6: Display

This one is easy: the Fitbit Edge has a 1.34-inch display compared to a 1.04-inch display on the Fitbit Charge 6. Both are reasonably bright AMOLED affairs, though the Edge's display appears to offer a higher maximum output, making it easier to view in daylight. This, coupled with the additional screen real estate, makes the Fitbit Edge easier to interact with (less squinting) than its predecessor.

Winner: Fitbit Edge

Fitbit Edge vs. Fitbit Charge 6: Specs compared

Fitbit Edge vs. Fitbit Charge 6: Health and fitness

The Fitbit Edge and Fitbit Charge 6 support a lot of the same basic health tracking features, like continuous heart rate and skin temperature monitoring, ECG and Sp02 readings, cycle tracking, and daily sleep reports.

However, the newer model has several key advantages over its predecessor, including support for Google's newer insulin resistance and blood pressure trend reports. It also supports important health safety tools like breathing emergency alerts and loss of pulse detection.

Finally, when it comes to logging outdoor workouts, the Fitbit Edge has one more advantage over the Charge 6: an onboard barometric altimeter for precise elevation loss/gain tracking.

Winner: Fitbit Edge

Fitbit Edge vs. Fitbit Charge 6: Smart features

This may come as somewhat of a surprise, but the 2023 Fitbit model actually has more smart features than the 2026 model.

Sure, both the Edge and Charge 6 are capable of mirroring smartphone notifications from paired Android and iOS devices. You can also control media playback from a paired smartphone with either wearable.

However, only the Fitbit Charge 6 has NFC and support for Google Wallet, allowing on-wrist contactless payments. Why Google removed this useful tech on the Edge, I cannot say, but it is a bummer.

Winner: Fitbit Charge 6

Fitbit Edge vs. Fitbit Charge 6: Battery life

Both the Fitbit Charge 6 and Fitbit Edge promise up to seven days of battery life per charge. In reality, the former lasts for close to five or six days. I've yet to test the battery performance of the Edge, but it will be interesting to see whether or not it lives up to its advertised longevity better than its sibling.

A full battery recharge on the Fitbit Charge 6 takes roughly two hours compared to 90 minutes for the Fitbit Edge.

Winner: draw

Fitbit Edge vs. Fitbit Charge 6: Outlook

While the older Fitbit Charge 6 is more affordable and a little sleeker than the newer Fitbit Edge, it lacks support for many of Google's most exciting new health and safety features, like loss of pulse detection, breathing emergency alerts, and blood pressure trend reports.

The Edge also boasts a larger, brighter display than its predecessor, more user-friendly controls, and potentially improved performance when tracking outdoor workouts. Ultimately, the only major advantage the Charge 6 has over the Edge is support for NFC.

Overall winner: Fitbit Edge

More from Tom's Guide

• Fitbit Air vs Fitbit Inspire 3 — which $99 fitness tracker wins?
• Fitbit Air vs Fitbit Charge 6 — which top-performing Fitness tracker wins?
• Google Fitbit Edge vs Fitbit Air: Which should you choose?

If you’ve been eyeing a smartwatch, there’s a good reason to check Amazon before paying full price. The retailer is currently offering massive discounts on top brands like Garmin, Apple, Google and more.

For instance, the Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra is currently 46% off. It will still cost you $349 but it's a pretty hefty discount. On the more wallet-friendly side, Garmin’s tried-and-true entry-level Forerunner 55 is just $161 on Amazon (was $199). Plus, Apple Watch SE 3 is sporting a $50 discount. Keep scrolling to check out more smartwatch deals on Amazon.

Quick Links

• shop all Amazon deals
• Fitbit Charge 6: was $159 now $132
• Garmin Forerunner 55: was $199 now $161
• Apple Watch SE 3 (GPS/42mm): was $249 now $199
• Garmin Forerunner 165 Music: was $249 now $199
• Google Pixel Watch 3 (GPS/45mm): was $399 now $199
• Garmin Instinct 3: was $449 now $299
• Galaxy Watch Ultra: was $649 now $349

Best Smartwatch Deals

Shop more deals

It’s been a good year for those with thin wrists, because wearable manufacturers have embraced a smaller form factor on several of the best sports watches to come out so far in 2026.

As a slender-wristed gentleman, I’ve already enjoyed testing the Suunto Run 2, Garmin Forerunner 170 and Apple Watch 12 this year, and even the Coros Pace 4 Pro, which has a large screen, is thin and light enough to sit snugly on my wrist.

On top of all these launches comes the Suunto Race 3S, which brings premium materials and long battery life to a small watch.

Its key improvements on the Suunto Race S (confusingly, there was no Race 2S, despite there being a Suunto Race 2) include a brighter display, longer battery life and better heart rate accuracy.

However, these improvements come with a major price increase, and it’s the high price of the Race 3S that make it a tough sell, especially with strong alternatives like the Coros Pace 4 Pro and Suunto Run 2 coming in cheaper.

Suunto Race 3S review: price and availability

The Suunto Race 3S launched on 15 October 2026 and costs $599 in the U.S. and £435 in the U.K., a significant price rise on the Suunto Race S titanium model, which was $449/£395 at launch, and is currently $329 on the Suunto website.

It’s the same price in the U.S. as the Suunto Race 2, and pricier than the Suunto Run 2, which costs from $349/£265. The Coros Pace 4 Pro is also cheaper at $449/£389, and I do think the price of the Suunto Race 3S will make it a tough sell compared to some rival options.

Suunto Race 3S review: design and display

The S is the watch’s name is a key part of its appeal, because the Suunto Race 3S aims to offer a premium experience in a smaller design, something that is often lacking in sports watches — the pricier and more feature-packed the model, the larger it tends to be.

It has a titanium bezel and sapphire crystal screen and a 2,000-nit, 1.32in AMOLED display that’s three times as bright as the one on the original Suunto Race S. I found this screen bright enough to read easily in all conditions, including bright sunshine.

The 46mm case isn’t as small as some watches, like the Forerunner 170 or Coros Pace 4, but the Suunto Race 3S has a more premium feel and is thin and fairly light at 56g with its silicone strap, and was comfortable to wear 24/7 in my testing.

There are three buttons on the watch, one of which is a digital dial. I sometimes found the watch slow to respond to the dial when rotating it, but mostly the user interface responds rapidly without any lag.

The Suunto Race 3S has an upgraded optical heart rate sensor compared to the one on the original Race, and I’ve found it to be considerably more accurate on this front than its predecessor. It also offers multi-band GPS tracking and can connect to external sensors via Bluetooth.

There is no built-in flashlight on the Suunto Race 3S unfortunately — Suunto only offers this feature on the top-of-the-range Vertical 2 — but there is a flashlight mode that uses the screen.

Suunto Race 3S review: sports tracking and training analysis

Scroll up from the watch face on the Suunto Race 3S and you’ll find a vast array of preset sports modes, and you can also create your own sports modes in the app.

Indeed you’ll need to do the latter if you want to customize the stats on show, as you can’t make changes to default sports modes (something you can do on any other brand’s sports watches I’ve tested), and there’s a limit of three customizable screens when making your own sports mode.

Unlike the cheaper Suunto Run 2, the Race 3S has access to the SuuntoPlus Store, where you can find a variety of extra sports features you can add onto your sports modes.

Some of these are handy additions, though I will say I personally didn’t miss these extras when testing the Suunto Run 2, which also has a simpler approach that allows you to edit default sports modes.

The training analysis on the watch is very heavy on the three-letter acronyms, so it can be quite impenetrable at first, but it does provide a wealth of useful information you can use to judge your training load.

Garmin and Coros do a better job of making their training analysis easier to understand in my opinion, and Garmin in particular has some extra analysis features including a useful training readiness score.

Suunto announced the launch of its new Suunto AI Coach feature alongside the Race 3S and I’ve not been able to test it out yet. It aims to create a conversational-style approach to guided training, and will be a paid-for service, though people who buy the Race 3S can register for three months of Suunto AI Coach for free before 31 December 2026.

Suunto Race 3S review: GPS and heart rate accuracy

I’ve been impressed by the GPS accuracy on the Suunto watches I’ve tested over the past couple of years, and that remains the case with the Suunto Race 3S.

I used the watch in the most accurate multi-band mode and it produced accurate GPS tracks and pace and distance stats in line with other top watches, including the Garmin Forerunner 970 and Coros Pace 4 Pro when testing them all side-by-side.

The heart rate accuracy was also pretty good for me, which hasn’t always been the case with Suunto watches. The improved optical sensor on the Race 3S is much better than the one on the Race S, and also proved more reliable than the sensor on the Race 2 in my testing.

I compared it to the readings from a chest strap on all my runs and during other workouts like indoor bike rides and strength sessions, and it generally matched up closely with the strap throughout.

There was the occasional erroneous spike in the watch’s readings though, and at the start of outdoor runs on colder days it did sometimes take a minute or two to lock into the correct reading, and lag a little behind a chest strap’s readings.

These aren’t uncommon issues with optical sensors and I do think the Race 3S and Run 2 are a considerable improvement on what I’ve experienced in the past with Suunto watches, but I’d say the best Garmin watches and the Apple Watch 12 are a little more reliable on this front.

Suunto Race 3S review: battery life

The Suunto Race 3S offers impressive battery life for a small watch with an AMOLED display, with the brand listing it as lasting up to 12 days in watch mode and offering up to 38 hours of multi-band GPS tracking.

In my testing I had the screen set to high brightness and always-on, and I ran every day with the watch using the GPS. It lasted me five to six days on a charge, which is pretty good going though not as long as the Coros Pace 4 Pro, which hits seven days for me with the same use.

The Race 3S is particularly strong on GPS battery life though, and will handle even extremely long events like ultramarathons easily in its most accurate GPS mode.

You charge the watch with a proprietary puck-style charger, which is the same one as used on the Suunto Run 2 but differs to other Suunto watches, which is less convenient than the systems used by Garmin and Coros where their watches all share the same charger.

Suunto Race 3S review: smart features

The Suunto Race 3S offers some basic smart features including offline music storage for files you drag and drop onto the watch (it doesn’t link up with streaming services like smartwatches or Garmin watches).

This feature was only meant to be available following an update after launch, but I was able to sync music to the watch and listen to it via Bluetooth headphones during testing.

It doesn’t offer NFC payments, but does have access to the SuuntoPlus store, where there are extra watch faces and data screens you can add to the Race 3S. This isn’t nearly as extensive as a smartwatch’s App Store or even Garmin’s Connect IQ store though.

You’re not going to be buying the Suunto Race 3S for smarts, I’d say. If those are important to you then a true smartwatch like the Apple Watch Ultra 4 is a better buy, or at least a Garmin watch with NFC and the ability to link with music streaming services.

Suunto Race 3S review: maps and navigation

With 64GB of storage you can download all the maps you want to the Suunto Race 3S via the Suunto app, and I found it easy and reasonably quick to get the areas I needed onto the watch when I set it up.

I found the maps to be bright and clear during activities and they loaded quickly when panning and zooming.

It’s also simple to create and sync routes to the watch through the partner app. The Race 3S also gives guidance on the elevation you’ll be tackling through an overall plot of your route and alerts when significant climbs and descents are coming up.

The maps on the watch are non-routable, meaning they plot your course over an image of a map rather than actually knowing where you are — Garmin watches do offer routable maps so can create a route for you on the fly, an occasionally handy extra feature.

Suunto Race 3S review: specs compared

Should you buy the Suunto Race 3S?

Suunto has significantly improved its watch line-up over the past couple of years and at first it was doing this while pricing its watches aggressively to undercut its biggest rivals.

The improvements do keep coming with the Suunto Race 3S, but it’s still not perfect and the price has rocketed, making it a hard watch to recommend over cheaper rivals, including some within the Suunto line-up like the Run 2 and original Race S.

I also prefer the Coros Pace 4 Pro myself as a watch that’s easier to use and still feels small on the wrist despite its larger display, and the Coros is cheaper too. You can also grab the old-but-gold Garmin Forerunner 965 in sales for less, though it’s not as small a watch.

Overall, the Suunto Race 3S is a very good smaller sports watch that looks great and mostly works well in my experience, but I think the price will hold it back, at least until it hits the sales.

Screen-less fitness trackers like Oura Ring, Whoop 5.0, and Garmin Cirqa may be the hot accessory in 2026, but I, for one, am thrilled to see Google finally add a new, petite screen-sporting wearable, the Fitbit Edge, to its portfolio.

The Fitbit Edge is a $179 follow-up to 2023’s Fitbit Charge 6, one of the best fitness trackers of all time, and a contemporary sibling to the screen-free Fitbit Air, another top-performing tracker. More advanced than the Air, the Fitbit Edge sits below the Google Pixel Watch 5, which is, you guessed it, one of the best smartwatches in 2026.

I lead TG’s wearable tech coverage, and I’ve been hoping for a Fitbit Charge 6 replacement for years. Now that it’s finally here, it’s time to decide whether or not it truly lives up to my expectations. With that in mind, here are the five biggest reasons to buy the new Fitbit Edge and the two biggest reasons to skip it, based on my initial impressions.

Buy: Onboard GPS

Two major design factors set the new $179 Fitbit Edge apart from the $99 Fitbit Air; the first is onboard GPS. Do you frequently log outdoor workouts, like walks, hikes, runs, and bike rides? If so, the Fitbit Edge will likely be a better choice for you than the Air. Why?

Because the Fitbit Air lacks onboard GPS, users have to carry a paired smartphone when recording outdoor activities if they want accurate location-based data for metrics like distance, pace, and climb. On the flip side, the Fitbit Edge has a built-in GPS antenna, allowing you to log that same data without the extra bulk of your smartphone.

The Edge even sports an onboard altimeter for on-device elevation tracking. As an avid mountain sports enthusiast, this is something I seriously appreciate.

Buy: 1.34-inch display

The second, perhaps more obvious difference between the Fitbit Edge and Fitbit Air is that the former has a display; the latter does not. The Edge’s 1.34-inch AMOLED touchscreen may not be enormous, but it represents a decent upgrade over the Fitbit Charge 6’s 1.04-inch display.

Unlike the Fitbit Air, users can start and stop workouts on the Edge without needing to open the companion Google Health app on their phone. You can also view your post-workout stats, recent sleep reports, current heart rate, mirrored smartphone notifications, and more.

Buy: Comprehensive holistic insights

Speaking of wellness, the Fitbit Edge is positively brimming with state-of-the-art holistic features, including heart rate variability monitoring, AFib detection, blood oxygen saturation measurements, continuous heart rate, breath rate, and skin temperature monitoring while you sleep, women’s health tracking, Loss of Pulse Detection, and even Breathing Emergency alerts.

Buy: Petite case design

I’m positively allergic to bulky wearables, which is why I’m such a big fan of the Fitbit Air. Not only is it one of the smallest, lightest fitness trackers on the market today and super comfy on the wrist, but it barely even looks like a piece of wearable tech.

The Fitbit Edge is a little less discreet, thanks to its 1.34-inch AMOLED screen. It’s also a bit larger and heavier than its stripped-back sibling. That said, the Fitbit Edge is roughly the same size as its easy-wearing, sleek-ish predecessor, the Fitbit Charge 6, and also a little lighter.

Buy: Compatibility with Android and iOS

Unlike the latest Pixel Watch series, the Fitbit Edge (like the Air) plays nicely with both Android and iOS smartphones. Better yet, the Edge supports mirrored smartphone notifications regardless of which OS you use. There are even a handful of basic pre-written quick replies you can use to quickly respond to texts.

Additionally, the Edge supports universal music control from any Bluetooth-connected device.

Skip: Some features are paywalled

While Google offers a lot of impressive wellness features for free, some of the more advanced, personalized insights and tools require a Google Health Premium subscription for $9.99 a month or $99 annually.

Paywalled features include adaptive fitness plans, sleep coaching tips, blood pressure and insulin resistance trend reports, and personalized metabolic recommendations.

Skip: Lacks NFC for contactless payments

All in all, the Fitbit Edge feels like a proper upgrade to the beloved Fitbit Charge 6 in all but one key way: it lacks NFC. So, while 2023’s Charge 6 supports Google Wallet for contactless payments, Fitbit Edge owners will have to carry a credit card or smartphone to pay for their post-hike pint or after-run pick-me-up.

What are your thoughts on the new Fitbit Edge? Let me know below. And stay tuned for my full review, coming soon.

More from Tom's Guide

• Google Fitbit Edge vs Fitbit Air: Which should you choose?
• Exclusive: Inside the Pixel Watch 5's breathing emergency detection — and why it's like an 'airbag on your wrist'
• Apple Watch Ultra 4 first impressions: 5 reasons to buy and 2 reasons to skip Apple’s new rugged model

I logged a 5,000-step walking workout with the Apple Watch Series 12 on my left wrist and the Garmin Forerunner 170 on my right wrist to find out which of these new smartwatches is the better fitness tracker.

The Apple Watch Series 12 is one of the best full-featured smartwatches of 2026, and the Garmin Forerunner 170 is one of the best budget-friendly running watches.

However, cost-wise, the Garmin is $349. The Apple Watch 12, meanwhile, starts at $399 and goes up to $549.

Apple Watch 12 vs Garmin Forerunner 170

Both smartwatches offer comparable onboard heart rate, location (GPS), and elevation tracking (altimeter) tech, plus bright, touch-sensitive displays and sleek cases. Safety- and wellness-focused features are plentiful too. But the Apple Watch supports way more apps and smart features, while the Forerunner has better training and recovery tools for runners.

Design-wise, the Forerunner 170 Music comes in a wider range of colorful, sporty options, but features a plastic case. The Series 12, by comparison, boasts an aluminum case. That said, it also weighs more. The 46mm Apple Watch 12 case is roughly 39 g compared to 26 g for the Forerunner 170 Music case.

I already tested the Apple Watch Series 12 versus the Garmin Venu 4, a higher-end ($549) sibling of the Forerunner 170. In that showdown, both devices impressed across the board, but the Venu 4 proved slightly more accurate. Will Garmin pull a repeat win? There’s only one way to know.

I walked 5,000 steps with the Apple Watch 12 vs Garmin Forerunner 170

As a primary control, I manually counted all 5,014 steps, using a tally counter to record every hundred. As a control for distance, climb, and pace, I turned to ol’ reliable, the Strava app.

Find the results of my Apple Watch 12 vs. Garmin Forerunner 170 Music walk test below, along with the five biggest takeaways from the data.

1. Both watches came remarkably close to my actual step count total

I've done dozens of these smartwatch walk tests, and my general rule of thumb is that any step count total within 100 steps of my actual tally is considered a solid result and within an acceptable margin of error. With that in mind, the Apple Watch 12 and Garmin Forerunner 170 each performed exceptionally well here.

The Series 12 undercounted by a mere 11 steps, while the Forerunner 170 was over by just six steps. Meanwhile, the Apple Watch and Garmin noted exactly the same amount of distance covered. More importantly, the tallies are also less than a tenth of a mile off from the control.

2. Garmin's climb data is slightly closer to the control

In my experience, even the best Apple Watch models sometimes inflate elevation gain data during outdoor workouts by a noticeable, albeit not outrageous, margin. That's again the case here.

The Apple Watch Series 12 noted 28 additional feet of climb compared to the control. The Forerunner 170, meanwhile, was off by just six feet, an impressive result.

3. Apple doesn't provide an average moving pace metric

Both the Strava app and Garmin provide average moving and elapsed pace metrics for outdoor workouts, like walks. Of the two, the former tends to be the more useful, as it more accurately reflects your overall speed.

Apple only provides one post-workout pace metric, and it's almost certainly elapsed pace, which is what I've recorded in the table above. That being said, Apple's average elapsed pace metric is closer to the control than Garmin's.

Meanwhile, Strava noted a moving pace of 18:07 per mile compared to 18:39 per mile for the Garmin.

4. Apple and Garmin's heart rate data is a perfect match

Both Apple and Garmin allow users to specify which wrist their smartwatch is on via the companion app. So, assuming those details are correctly entered, there should be zero difference in heart rate tracking accuracy between your right and left wrists. But is that actually the case?

The results of this walk test suggest that the answer is yes, seeing as both wearables noted identical average and max heart rates for my ~50-minute walk.

5. Garmin burned through more battery, but overall, proved more accurate

One might assume Garmin smartwatches always beat Apple Watches when it comes to battery performance, but this showdown proves that isn't always true. While the Garmin Forerunner 170 Music can far outlast the Apple Watch Series 12 in standard smartwatch mode, when using continuous GPS and heart rate tracking, the Apple Watch Series 12 actually has the advantage.

That said, when it comes to comparing the fitness tracking performance of the Apple Watch Series 12 vs. the Garmin Forerunner 170 Music, the latter slightly outperforms the former... in this test, at least. The Forerunner 170 produced an ever-so-slightly more accurate step count and climb total, while the Series 12 was closer in terms of pace.

Which of these two smartwatches would you rather use to keep tabs on your health and fitness? Let me know in the poll below.

More from Tom's Guide

• I walked 5,500 steps with the Apple Watch 12 vs Garmin Venu 4 — here's the winner
• Apple Watch Series 12 vs Apple Watch Ultra 4: Which new Apple Watch should you buy?
• I’ve tested over 100 fitness trackers head-to-head — 3 workout stats I trust the least

I’ll let you in on a secret — I never really liked the Fitbit Charge 6. Sure, it’s been one of the most popular fitness trackers on the market for years, and when someone asked me for a Fitbit recommendation (pre-the launch of the Fitbit Air earlier this year), the Charge 6 was the one I’d recommend. But between the slightly boxy look and the tiny screen that was impossible to use with sweaty fingers, I didn’t love it.

Yesterday, Google announced the launch of the $180 Fitbit Edge, coming October 27, and it looks to be replacing the Charge 6 in the brand’s lineup, sitting between the $99 Fitbit Edge and the $399 Google Pixel Watch 5.

Here’s why I’m excited about the new fitness tracker:

1. There's loads of different band options

At launch, Google has shown us tons of different band options coming with the Fitbit Edge. There’s everything from plastic active bands to sleek metal options, and like the Fitbit Air, it looks to be super easy to swap between them.

This makes it easy to upgrade the look of your fitness tracker at the click of two buttons, making it much more versatile. We’re not sure yet how much these extra bands will cost, and at the time of writing, you can only choose between the active band and the Stephen Curry looped band when pre-ordering.

2. It's larger than the Charge 6

While this won’t be a selling point for everyone, I’m pleased that the Fitbit Edge is slightly larger than the Fitbit Charge 6. The dimensions aren’t hugely different: 39.2 x 25.6 mm, compared to 36.7 x 23.1 mm on the Fitbit Charge 6, yet the screen is much bigger.

As mentioned above, I found the screen of the Fitbit Charge 6 difficult to use, especially with sweaty or wet fingers, so the larger, brighter screen is a welcome addition.

3. There's a physical button on the side

If you’ve read any of my articles on Tom’s Guide before, you’ll know that I hate a fitness tracker without any buttons. As well as a bigger, brighter screen, there’s also a physical button on the side of the Fitbit Edge, which seems to be an actual button you can click, rather than the haptic button on the Fitbit Charge 6.

4. Unlike the Fitbit Air, it has an ECG sensor

If you flip the Fitbit Edge over, you’ll see that you’re getting quite a few sensors for $180. The heart rate sensor looks pretty similar to that used in the Fitbit Air, which I’ve found to be extremely accurate. It takes a reading every two seconds, giving you accurate heart rate readings, but the Fitbit Edge takes this further with an ECG sensor, which can detect signs of A-Fib.

There’s also a skin temperature sensor, which can help give you menstrual cycle insights, HRV tracking, and an SpO2 sensor to track blood oxygen saturation. All of these are pretty standard on fitness trackers these days, but you’re getting a lot for your money here.

5. There's built-in GPS

As well as the screen, one of the main selling points of this tracker over the Fitbit Air is the built-in GPS, allowing you to track your runs and rides outside without having to have your phone with you.

Plus, at launch, Google really highlighted the updated automatic activity tracking coming later this month on the Fitbit Edge and Fitbit Air, saying it will be able to recognise exercises like stand-up paddleboarding and yoga, as well as more typical ones like bike rides, walks, and runs.

Of course, with the Edge, you have the option of easily starting a workout from your wrist, but I’m excited to try the new feature, as I’ve never found automatic activity tracking to be all that great.

6. Tracking gets a big upgrade from the Fitbit Charge 6

Finally, if we’re comparing this to the Fitbit Charge 6, it’s a much better fitness tracker in general. You’ve got all of the new features released that were released with the Fitbit Air, including cardio load, VO2 max, and the readiness feature, which tells you how ‘ready’ you are to push yourself.

There’s also Google’s Gemini-powered health coach for Google Health Premium subscribers, which I’ve found one of the best out there. In my testing, rather than just regurgitating your own stats back to you, it’ll give you actionable insights into how to recover smarter.

I’ll be putting the Google Edge to the test once I get my hands on a device in the next few weeks, but it’s shaping up to be a decent option if you’re not after a smartwatch, or you love the sound of the Fitbit Air, but aren’t quite sure if a screenless device is for you.

More from Tom's Guide

• Can the $99 Fitbit Air beat the $799 Apple Watch Ultra 3 at fitness tracking? I manually counted 4,500 steps to find out
• I walked 4,000 steps with the Apple Watch Ultra 3 vs Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 — and the winning margin was razor-thin
• Oura vs Whoop vs Fitbit Air — 5 questions to ask yourself before buying a screen-free fitness tracker

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again — the Fitbit Air is one of my favorite fitness trackers to launch this year. At $99, it’s super affordable, it’s extremely comfortable to wear, and the Google Health app is excellent. Yet my one gripe has been that, while it looks a lot more discreet than a Whoop or Garmin Cirqa, I’d still take it off if I was going out with friends.

That is, until now — along with the Fitbit Edge, Google quietly released some new premium metal bands for the Fitbit Air, and they look beautiful. Move over, Oura; there’s a new device that looks like jewelry — read on to find out more.

Fitbit Air Metal Mesh band: when is it coming and what will it cost?

The Metal Mesh band is made from stainless steel and will be available in champagne gold or polished silver. On its own, it’ll cost $70, but you can also buy one that is paired with an Obsidian Fitbit Air for $149. This gives users the option to buy a more expensive-looking version of the tracker, but even with just the band itself, you won’t be able to see the little pebble when it’s on your wrist.

Of course, I’m yet to see the band up close, but they definitely give the Fitbit Air a premium facelift. The finely woven metal bands allow the device to disappear onto the wrist and look more like jewelry than any of the bands it launched with. At first glance, you probably wouldn’t even notice the tracker, making it more like the Oura Ring in terms of discreet fitness tracking.

The new bands will be available on October 27, when the Fitbit Edge launches. I, personally, can’t wait to get my hands on the Champagne gold band, but let me know what you think of the new launches in the comments below, and whether $70 is too much to spend when the tracker itself only costs $99.

Until then, I’ll sit here patiently waiting for Google to release the armband we’ve all been asking for.

More from Tom's Guide

• Can the $99 Fitbit Air beat the $799 Apple Watch Ultra 3 at fitness tracking? I manually counted 4,500 steps to find out
• I walked 4,000 steps with the Apple Watch Ultra 3 vs Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 — and the winning margin was razor-thin
• Oura vs Whoop vs Fitbit Air — 5 questions to ask yourself before buying a screen-free fitness tracker

Fans of the Fitbit Charge 6, listen up—Google just launched the new $179 Fitbit Edge, and it replaces the Charge in the brand’s fitness-tracker lineup.

But where does it fit in Google’s smartwatch lineup? And should you choose the Fitbit Edge or the $99 Fitbit Air? Read on to find out more

What is the Fitbit Edge?

Google hasn’t released a Fitbit Charge since 2023, and at a glance, the Fitbit Edge seems to be replacing the budget fitness tracker.

On paper, it has a lot of the same features as the Charge: a small display, a week of battery life, built-in GPS, and the ability to track your workouts, sleep, and stress from your wrist. It won’t give you as many apps or notifications as a smartwatch, but it will do all the basics when it comes to keeping an eye on your health and fitness goals.

Design-wise, it looks more modern, with rounded edges compared to the Fitbit Charge 6’s boxier look. It’s also slightly bigger at 39.2 x 25.6 mm, compared to 36.7 x 23.1 mm on the Fitbit Charge 6.

The Fitbit Edge costs $180/£160 and comes in four different colors in the active band option: olive green, black, white, or pink.

The olive version has an olive aluminum casing, and the pink Fitbit Edge has a champagne gold casing. Like the Fitbit Air, there’s also a special edition Stephen Curry band, which is more expensive. Like the Fitbit Air, it’s easy to swap between bands, and from the looks of things, there are plenty more options coming soon.

Like the Fitbit Air, if you want to unlock the Gemini-powered health coach, or some of the more advanced sleep features, you’ll need to pay for a Google Health Premium membership.

This is an extra expense, but in my testing, the Fitbit Air has the best AI-powered health coach out there, so if you use it, it’s worth it.

You can pre-order the Fitbit Edge now, for release on October 27.

Should you buy the Fitbit Edge or the Fitbit Air?

Here’s the big question, though: should you buy the Fitbit Edge or the $99 Fitbit Air? The answer really depends on how much you want your fitness tracker to have a screen.

I’m yet to test the Fitbit Edge, but will, of course, be following up with a full review once I get my hands on one. The Fitbit Air, on the other hand, is one of my favorite fitness trackers of 2026.

Part of the appeal when it comes to the Fitbit Air is its low cost and its comfortable design. For $99, you’re getting an excellent fitness tracker that’s seriously comfortable. However, you obviously can’t see any live feedback during your workouts.

The Fitbit Edge seems to be in the middle. It won’t give you all the notifications and apps as the Pixel Watch 5, but it will give you more than the Fitbit Air, which doesn’t have a screen, an ECG app, or built-in GPS.

Unlike the Google Pixel Watch 5, the Fitbit Edge will work with Android and iOS.

We’ll be testing the Fitbit Edge soon, so keep an eye on Tom’s Guide!

More from Tom's Guide

• Can the $99 Fitbit Air beat the $799 Apple Watch Ultra 3 at fitness tracking? I manually counted 4,500 steps to find out
• I walked 4,000 steps with the Apple Watch Ultra 3 vs Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 — and the winning margin was razor-thin
• Oura vs Whoop vs Fitbit Air — 5 questions to ask yourself before buying a screen-free fitness tracker