Which new screen-free fitness tracker is more accurate, the Fitbit Air or the Garmin Cirqa? I decided to find out by popping one on either wrist and logging a long walk.

Even though the Garmin Cirqa is twice the cost of the Fitbit Air — $199 vs $99 — these two trackers have a lot in common. Screen-free, your primary method for interacting with either is through the companion app. That said, the Cirqa also has one physical button to start and stop workouts.

More importantly, neither has onboard GPS, so both require you to bring your paired phone along when logging an outdoor workout so that they can piggyback off its location and elevation data.

Now, on to the test!

Fitbit Air vs Garmin Cirqa: Walk test rules

I manually counted 7,000 steps — using my trusty $6 tally counter to log every hundred — with the Fitbit Air on my left wrist and the Garmin Cirqa on my right wrist to determine which is the more accurate fitness tracker.

I also ran Strava on my iPhone 16 Plus for additional step count, distance, elevation, and pace data. For the Fitbit Air, I manually began a walking workout from the Google Health app. For the Garmin Cirqa, I started the workout by pressing the single button. This proved to be a mistake.

Fitbit Air vs Garmin Cirqa: Walk test results

It took me about one hour to walk 7,000 steps around sunny Seattle, Washington, a step count total that all three tracking methods came remarkably close to. For these tests, I consider any tally within 100 steps of my actual total to be outstanding.

Ultimately, the Fitbit Air undercounted by a mere ten steps, while the Garmin Cirqa overcounted by 70. Strava, meanwhile, overcounted by ten.

Unfortunately, because the Cirqa logged my efforts as a generic workout rather than an outdoor walk, it frustratingly didn't register any distance, climb, or pace data for this test.

The Fitbit Air, on the other hand, logged the same distance as Strava, which isn't too surprising given both are making use of the same GPS data. However, its climb data is seemingly waaaay off. This is neither the first nor the second time I've had an issue with climb data when it comes to the Air.

Fortunately, the Air's pace data is much more aligned with Strava's.

The lack of consistency between the Air and Cirqa for heart rate data is a tad concerning. Without control data, it's hard to say for sure which watch is more accurate in this regard, but I suspect it's the Garmin, given my walk involved quickly ascending several very steep hills, which definitely got the blood pumping.

Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 vs Apple Watch Ultra 3: Winner

Despite continuing to struggle with climb data, the Fitbit Air beats the Garmin Cirqa in this walk test head-to-head by a small but legit margin. This is similar to the results my colleague Jane discovered when she tested these two gadgets against one another in a 4,000-step comparison.

Stay tuned for more testing and coverage of the Garmin Cirqa, including my full review, coming soon.

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 test a lot of smartwatches and fitness trackers here at Tom’s Guide. I mean A LOT. If the device was released in the past three years, there’s a very good chance I’ve not only helped to review it but also tested it head-to-head against the competition.

The vast majority of name-brand wearables track heart rate, distance, and step count — assuming you're going for a walk or hike — with impressive consistency, in my experience. For example, I’ve performed dozens of walk tests where I wear a device on either wrist and manually count my steps to see which comes closer.

Not only do most modern wearables come within a few hundred steps of my actual count — an impressive accomplishment when we're talking 5,000 or more steps per walk — but most also report similar distance data, down to a few tenths of a mile, and broadly the same heart rate data, give or take a handful of beats per minute.

That said, there are three workout stats that are consistently, well... inconsistent. And it's not just wallet-friendly models that struggle; even some of the best smartwatches and best fitness trackers occasionally have hiccups tracking these metrics.

The three fitness tracking stats I trust the least

1. Elevation gain

As an avid mountain sports enthusiast and someone who enjoys urban hiking and biking in a particularly hilly part of the U.S. (Seattle, WA), inconsistent elevation tracking seriously irks me. For example, it’s not unusual for a standard midday, two-mile walk to involve several hundred feet of climb.

Unfortunately, a lot of wearables come up short when it comes to assessing upward effort.

Not only that, some popular wearables don’t even offer a metric for elevation gain in the post-workout report, like the Fitbit Inspire 3. Others, like the newer Fitbit Air — a wearable I otherwise really like — measure elevation about as accurately as a newborn shooting pool.

Even the best Apple Watch models occasionally report inaccurate climb data. From my experience, the Ultra 3 is rock-solid, but both the Series 11 and SE 3 have been known to log slightly inflated elevation stats from time to time.

For what it’s worth, the brand I’ve found most consistent with elevation tracking is Garmin, that is, assuming you purchase one of the best Garmin watches, specifically, one with an onboard barometric altimeter. The new Forerunner 70, for example, lacks one.

2. Pace

Speaking of Garmin, it’s one of the few smartwatch brands that provides two pace metrics for outdoor activities like walks, hikes, runs, and bike rides: an average moving pace and an average elapsed (total) pace.

For most of us, the former is the more valuable metric, as it ignores long pauses — like waiting at a traffic light or stopping for a sip of water — thereby providing a more accurate measure of your actual moving effort.

Unfortunately, brands like Apple and Google only offer one pace metric in their respective workout reports. And though they don’t specify which pace metric it is, it's almost always slower than the competition’s moving pace stat, suggesting both are reporting elapsed pace, the less valuable one.

3. Calories

Post-workout calorie counts are perhaps the most all over the place in my testing. For example, it’s not uncommon for one device to log one hundred or more calories burned than another after the exact same workout.

In fact, this metric tends to be so inconsistent that I mostly ignore it completely. Not only are most manufacturers opaque about how the calorie counts are even calculated in the first place, but key factors like a user's metabolism or muscle mass are rarely taken into account when generating them.

Which fitness tracking stats do you think are bupkis? Let me know in the poll below.

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 5,500 steps with the Apple Watch SE 3 vs Garmin Forerunner 70 — and the results surprised me
• I ran a 5K with the Garmin Forerunner 570 vs Apple Watch Ultra 3, and although the pace data matched up perfectly across both devices, the Garmin’s exercise load metric and detailed vertical ratio analysis made it the clear winner

Can the $99 Fitbit Air beat the $799 Apple Watch Ultra 3? I manually counted 4,500 steps to find out.

Steps are, of course, just one of the many metrics these high-tech wearables keep tally of, but for this head-to-head, it’s the primary figure I’ll be using to declare a winner.

I also tracked my Fitbit Air vs Apple Watch Ultra 3 walk using the Strava app as a control for distance, climb, and pace.

Read on for the results!

Can a $99 Fitbit beat a $799 Apple Watch?

But first, if you’re thinking that this isn’t really a fair competition given the price difference between the Fitbit Air and Apple Watch Ultra 3, you’d be right! But who doesn’t love a good old-fashioned underdog showdown?

It is worth noting just a few of the key differences between these two trendy wearables before moving on to the outcome. The Fitbit Air is a discreet, screen-free health and fitness tracker with no buttons, notifications, or onboard GPS. While tracking a workout, the Air relies on a paired smartphone for location and elevation data.

The Apple Watch Ultra 3 sports a sizable, ultra-bright display and is easily one of the most high-tech, feature-packed smartwatches on the market. It boasts a dual-frequency GPS antenna and dedicated altimeter for logging outdoor adventures.

With that out of the way, here are the results of my 4,500-step walk test between the $99 Fitbit Air and the $799 Apple Watch Ultra 3.

Fitbit Air vs Apple Watch Ultra 3: Walk test results

Both wearables calculated my total steps with passable accuracy, but the Ultra 3 was closer. As a rule of thumb, I consider any step count total that's within ~150 steps of my actual count to be within a reasonable margin for error/impressive.

Strava, for what's worth, noted 4,496 total steps.

The Fitbit Air's distance measurement is a little further off from the control than the Apple Watch Ultra 3's, but not by a concerning amount.

What is a tad concerning is the fact that Google seemingly removed climb data from the post-workout report. Notably, because every other time I've logged a walking workout using the Air, the metric was there.

However, after some poking around, it appears the lack of climb data may be due to my inadvertently changing the Google Health app's location data setting on my paired phone from "always" to "while using the app" via an ill-timed pop-up.

Then again, I had the app open for the duration of my test, and it managed to pull all the other usual location-based metrics, so I'm not 100% convinced this caused the hiccup.

Coincidentally, as noted in my Fitbit Air vs Pixel Watch 4 and Fitbit Air vs Apple Watch 11 walk tests, accurate elevation tracking isn't exactly the Air's strong suit. Whether inconsistent or missing entirely, I'm hopeful this is something Google irons out with future firmware.

Moving on, the Fitbit Air noted a slower pace than the competition, which is a bit strange, given it measured less distance than Strava and the Ultra 3. More reassuringly, heart rate and calorie data from the Fitbit and Apple Watch pretty much align for this hilly, ~42-minute walk.

Fitbit Air vs Apple Watch Ultra 3: Winner

When pondering whether the $99 Fitbit Air can keep up with the $799 Apple Watch Ultra 3 at reliably tracking an outdoor workout, the answer is, well, not quite. The Apple Watch Ultra 3 proved more precise across the board, not just at tracking total steps, but pace and climb, too.

When it comes to the Fitbit Air, even though it didn't log my workout as accurately as its pricier rival, the results were still in the ballpark (missing elevation data aside). For most folks, myself included, that's more than good enough for my exercise logging needs.

More from Tom's Guide

• I walked 3,000 steps with the Fitbit Air vs Garmin Forerunner 70 — and I’m seriously amazed by the results
• The Fitbit Air is basically just a screen-less Fitbit Inspire 3 — and that’s a very good thing
• Oura vs Whoop vs Fitbit Air — 5 questions to ask yourself before buying a screen-free fitness tracker

I pitted the $99 Fitbit Air against the $349 Pixel Watch 4 in a head-to-head fitness tracking comparison to determine which is the more precise Google wearable. The results genuinely surprised me.

The Fitbit Air is a lightweight, screen-free fitness tracking band that's as easy on the wallet as it is comfortable on the wrist. The Pixel Watch 4 is Google's flagship smartwatch, with a large, bright display and features galore, including a handy, voice- or gesture-activated Gemini AI assistant.

To find out which of these flagship Google products is the more competent fitness tracker — at least when it comes to step-counting — I walked 4,000 steps with the Fitbit Air on my right wrist and the Pixel Watch 4 on my left. My primary control metric for the comparison is total steps taken. To ensure a precise tally on my end, I manually counted my steps, noting every hundred with a click of my old-school tally counter.

As a control for distance, pace, and climb, I brought along my iPhone 16 Plus and logged the walk using the Strava app. Find the results of the Fitbit Air vs Pixel Watch 4 walk test below.

Fitbit Air vs Pixel Watch 4: fitness tracking accuracy compared

When it comes to tracking outdoor workouts, it's important to note a key difference between the Fitbit Air and Pixel Watch 4. The former lacks onboard GPS, so for location-based insights, you need to carry along a paired smartphone.

In addition to piggybacking off of your phone's GPS antenna, the Fitbit Air also relies on its altimeter for elevation data. The Pixel Watch 4, meanwhile, boasts both an onboard GPS antenna and a barometric altimeter.

Now, on to the test results!

Fitbit Air vs Pixel Watch 4: Walk test results

I took exactly 4,000 steps (manually counted) during my 38-minute walk, including a stroll up Seattle's steepest block (for old-time's sake). While both wearables noted step count totals within 15 steps of my actual count — a seriously impressive result and well within a reasonable margin for error — much to my surprise, the Fitbit Air was a little bit closer than the Pixel Watch 4.

The Air and Pixel Watch 4 also beat Strava, which logged 3,978 steps.

The Fitbit Air's distance data is additionally more in line with the control; the same goes for pace. However, the Air's climb data is woefully inaccurate, a result I noted in my previous walk test with the Fitbit Air vs Apple Watch 11.

When it comes to heart rate and calories, the Air logged a slightly less aggressive workout compared to the Pixel Watch 4. The Air also used marginally less battery — not surprising, since it lacks a display.

Fitbit Air vs Pixel Watch 4: Winner

And the winner is... the Fitbit Air, thanks to a slightly more accurate step count total, pace metric, and distance data. That said, the Air's win versus the Pixel Watch 4 comes with an asterisk due to disappointing elevation tracking performance.

The Pixel Watch 4, meanwhile, performed with acceptable accuracy across the board, including measuring my climb. For this reason, as someone who loves mountain sports, I'd likely opt for the latest Pixel Watch over the Fitbit Air for logging my next adventure. What do you think? Let me know which Google wearable you prefer in the poll below.

Which fitness trackers or smartwatches should I test head-to-head next?

More from Tom's Guide

• I walked 3,000 steps with the Fitbit Air vs Garmin Forerunner 70 — and I’m seriously amazed by the results
• Oura vs Whoop vs Fitbit Air — 5 questions to ask yourself before buying a screen-free fitness tracker
• Exclusive: Google design director says Fitbit Air reception proves they 'made the right decision' going screen-free

Apple Watch Series 11 or Fitbit Air, which popular wearable is the more competent/reliable fitness tracker? I decided to find out by performing one of my renowned head-to-head walk tests.

For this showdown, I wore the Apple Watch 11 on my left wrist and the Fitbit Air on my right wrist for a 5,000-step walk around beautiful Seattle, Washington. How do I know it was 5,000 steps? I counted every darn one, with some assistance from my trusty tally counter (one click= 100 steps).

Now, if I were a betting man (I'm not), my money would be on the Series 11 to come out victorious. Not only is it one of the best smartwatches in 2026, but it's also four times the cost of the Fitbit Air: $399 vs $99.

Then again, the Fitbit Air may be affordable, but it's also one of the best fitness trackers in 2026. Not only that, when I pitted in a separate walk test versus the Apple Watch SE 3, the Air surprisingly came out victorious. Will this be a repeat win? Read on!

Apple Watch 11 vs Fitbit Air: tech compared

When it comes to wrist-based trackers, the Fitbit Air and Apple Watch 11 couldn't be more different. The former has no screens, buttons, or notifications, and lasts up to a week.

The Series 11, meanwhile, is a super-connected device, boasting a large, bright touchscreen, multiple physical buttons, and compatibility with a dizzying array of apps. That said, the Series 11 comes up short on battery life; 24 hours per charge is the norm.

Another major difference: the Fitbit Air has no onboard GPS for location tracking or altimeter for elevation data, so you need to carry a smartphone along when logging an outdoor workout. The Apple Watch 11, on the other wrist, has both GPS and an altimeter.

With that out of the way, let's move on to the results!

Apple Watch 11 vs Fitbit Air: Walk test results

Before we begin, it's worth noting that Strava appears to have had a "hiccup" while recording this walk test. How do I know? The app logged just 4,506 steps, which is a major red flag. Normally, Strava's step-count data is within 10-20 steps of my actual count. TLDR: Take Strava's distance, climb, and pace data with a grain of salt.

Anyhow, both the Apple Watch 11 and Fitbit Air performed admirably when it came to keeping an accurate tally of my steps — anything within ~150 steps of the control is considered excellent in my book — but the Apple Watch was just a little closer!

Distance data between the Apple Watch and Fitbit Air is similar enough for my liking. The Fitbit noted slightly more ground covered but also a faster pace, which checks out.

The Fitbit Air's elevation metric is concerningly inaccurate (this walk was particularly hill-heavy), which doesn't make a whole lot of sense, given the device can piggyback off of the iPhone 16 Plus's climb data. This also isn't the first time I experienced less-than-precise elevation tracking insights from the Fitbit Air; it was also way lower than expected versus the Apple Watch SE 3.

Fortunately, the Fitbit Air finishes strong: Heart rate data is a perfect match with the Apple Watch Series 11, a result I love to see. Meanwhile, the Air logged slightly more calories burned, but used way less battery during my ~42-minute stroll.

Apple Watch 11 vs Fitbit Air: Winner

Ultimately, the Apple Watch Series 11 wins this showdown of fitness tracking accuracy against the Fitbit Air, with a more precise total step count and climb data.

Which fitness trackers or smartwatches should I pit head-to-head next? Let me know in the comments below. Also, which do you prefer, the Apple Watch 11 or the Fitbit Air? Share your opinion in the poll below.

More from Tom's Guide

• I walked 3,000 steps with the Fitbit Air vs Garmin Forerunner 70 — and I’m seriously amazed by the results
• The Fitbit Air is basically just a screen-less Fitbit Inspire 3 — and that’s a very good thing
• Oura vs Whoop vs Fitbit Air — 5 questions to ask yourself before buying a screen-free fitness tracker

From the Oura Ring 5 to the Fitbit Air to the Whoop 5.0, screen-less health and fitness trackers are more popular than ever. But is a display-free wearable better than, say, the best smartwatch on the market today?

That depends on your expectations for the device, namely, whether you want a piece of tech that monitors your health passively or something you interact with more actively.

As TG’s resident wearables expert — and someone who just reviewed the new Fitbit Air — below are the five biggest things to consider before committing to the no-screen lifestyle.

1. Is distraction-free the way to be?

Whether you're considering one of the best smart rings, like the Oura Ring 5 or the more wallet-friendly Ringconn Gen 2 Air, or a screen-less fitness band, like the Whoop 5.0 or Fitbit Air, all of these wearables promise distraction-free health and fitness tracking insights.

Of course, if you want mirrored smartphone notifications, there is no shortage of wrist-based wearables that fill the role, including the $99 Fitbit Inspire 3 and $50 Amazfit Band 7. In fact, when comparing the Fitbit Air vs. the Fitbit Inspire 3, both devices offer broadly the same set of data; the Inspire 3 is just a little more "connected."

The point is, when it comes to screen-free fitness trackers in 2026, giving up the display also means giving up the ability to receive on-wrist/finger smartphone alerts. If that sounds delightful, read on.

2. Am I ready to bond with a companion app?

Most of the best screen-free wellness trackers, including the Oura Ring 5 and Fitbit Air, lack buttons, which means the companion app is your new best friend, whether you're checking how much battery you have left or trying to start tracking a workout.

As such, it's a good idea to get a sense of whether or not you vibe with, say, the Google Health app (formerly the Fitbit app) if you're considering the Fitbit Air. It's also worth mentioning that both Oura and Whoop charge monthly fees for their respective apps.

That said, there are plenty of subscription-free smart rings and trackers available (some with screens, some without). The tradeoff is that Oura and Whoop's holistic insights are the most in-depth across the board, especially for hardcore athletes. The Fitbit Air, on the other wrist, is subscription-optional and more geared toward casual health-conscious users.

3. Smart features? What smart features?

With no display, buttons, or notifications, it probably doesn't come as much of a surprise that the best screen-free fitness trackers also lack support for smart features. Still, I would love to see NFC added to a smart ring, if for no other reason, because paying for something with a tap of the finger sounds positively futuristic.

4. No GPS, no problem?

For my outdoor workout peeps, one of the biggest considerations to make before investing in a screen-free wearable is whether or not you can get by without onboard GPS.

While many of the best smartwatches and some of the best fitness trackers have built-in GPS antennas, no smart rings or screen-free trackers do. This means, for accurate location-based data when working out, you'll need to bring your paired smartphone along for insights into your distance, speed, pace, climb, and more after a run, walk, bike ride, etc.

5. Am I big on battery life?

It still kind of blows my mind that one of the most popular smartwatches in 2026 only lasts for roughly 24 hours per charge. I'm speaking, of course, of the Apple Watch Series 11.

Fortunately, screen-free wearables, by and large, beat their display-graced siblings when it comes to longevity. In fact, from smart rings to fitness bands, most will last up to a week, sometimes more, per charge.

What do you think of screen-free wearables? Do you already own one? Are you considering one? Let me know in the poll or comments below.

More from Tom's Guide

• Exclusive: Google design director says Fitbit Air reception proves they 'made the right decision' going screen-free
• Leaked Apple Watch 12 design change is the opposite of an upgrade — and that has me worried
• 5 reasons why I sometimes still wear a 'dumb' watch

I’m not sure whether it’s the fact I’m training for a marathon (again), or that I have a toddler who wakes me up at least once a night, but when I do sleep, I go into a coma.

I’ve been seriously impressed with the new $99 Fitbit Air — in fact, I’d go as far as to say it’s one of the best wearables to launch so far this year, but I’ve had one issue with it: the haptic alarm just isn’t strong enough to wake me from said sleep coma in the mornings.

I know what you’re thinking — surely my two-year-old is my alarm clock, and you’d be right, but as any parent knows, if I want to drink a warm cup of coffee, do a quick Pilates workout, or just sit and stare at my phone in silence, the only way to do so is to wake up before he does. Luckily, I’ve found a hidden Fitbit Air hack that solves this problem — read on to find out more.

I found that by making this simple tweak, I was definitely able to feel the alarm going off on my wrist in the morning. It was still silent enough that it didn’t wake my toddler if he had crept into my bed at 2 am, and I was able to have 20 minutes of peace before my day began.

If I didn’t have a human alarm clock, I’d love the custom alarm schedule on the Fitbit Air, which allows you to set different alarms for different days of the week. The Smart Wake feature also looks great for those who don’t want such an abrupt start to their day — the Fitbit Air will gently wake you up in a timeframe that’s best for your REM sleep, helping you wake up feeling more refreshed. A girl can only dream.

Did you know about this hidden vibration setting? Follow Tom’s Guide for more Fitbit Air tips and tricks.

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

More from Tom's Guide

• I review smartwatches for a living, but these are 5 reasons why I sometimes still wear a 'dumb' watch
• Apple Watch Series 12 rumors — everything we know so far
• Garmin’s rumored screen-less wearable just might be the subscription-free Whoop rival I’ve been waiting for

Ever since the Fitbit Air launched in May 2026, the conversation has almost always been about its price point. Reviews have been calling it a "$100 Whoop killer," and even we named it the best Whoop alternative for the rest of us. But one thing everyone seems to be missing is whether the tracking is actually any good.

Sure, it costs less, but does the Fitbit and Google name automatically mean it's great at tracking your health? Does it even give insights that are, first of all, accurate and then actually useful?

I've been tracking my sleep with both the Fitbit Air and the Whoop MG for a week, and the Fitbit Air actually held up much better than I expected. It's not perfect, though, and there are a few things you should know before buying one.

Here's how I tested both trackers side by side

Before we get into the numbers, there's one thing worth knowing upfront: I've been using the Whoop MG for over a year now. It's been my primary fitness and health tracking device for that entire time, which means it has a lot more context about my body compared to the Fitbit Air.

I got the Fitbit Air around June 16 and started properly testing it from the night of June 17. For this test, I wore the Fitbit Air on my left, non-dominant wrist, while my Whoop MG has been on a bicep band on the same arm for the past three months. I tracked a full week across both devices from June 17 to June 25, with two nights being an exception where I actually slept without any of the bands because I fell sick.

Before we dive into the numbers, though, it's worth knowing that since the Fitbit Air was brand new out of the box, it was still building its baseline during the first couple of nights.

It's also worth noting that wearing the Whoop MG on the bicep rather than the wrist does influence readings. Both are valid measurement points, but it's commonly believed that less movement leads to more accurate results.

The wrist moves around a lot, while the bicep stays relatively still, so the Whoop data could be slightly more accurate because of that, though I can't say for certain. Either way, the Fitbit Air doesn't offer a bicep band yet, so if a bicep option is something you need, the Whoop MG is currently the only choice.

Fitbit needed a few nights before the data made sense

As expected, the Fitbit Air took a couple of days to calibrate to my body and sleep patterns. I wasn't expecting it to agree with the Whoop MG right from the first night, and that was pretty obvious in the data. On day one, there was almost a one-hour difference in total sleep. Fitbit Air logged just 5 hours and 15 minutes of sleep, while the Whoop MG recorded around 6 hours and 15 minutes.

Thankfully, things improved quickly after that. From the second night onward, the two trackers became much more consistent. On the final two nights of my testing (June 22 and June 25), both devices recorded roughly seven hours of sleep on one night and around seven and a half hours on the other, with only about a 15-minute difference.

I'd call that accurate enough for tracking total sleep duration. If all you care about is knowing how long you slept, the Fitbit Air becomes much more reliable after a few days of wear.

Sleep stages, though, are a completely different story. Even after a week, both devices continued to disagree quite a bit on deep sleep and REM sleep. You can see from the table above that there are some pretty noticeable differences between the two, despite both devices tracking the exact same nights.

Which one is actually right? Honestly, it's hard to tell after just a week of testing. A longer testing period might reveal whether the two begin converging over time, but that is something I'll give one or two months to test.

It's also worth noting that placement could be playing a role here. As I mentioned above, I wore the Whoop MG on my left bicep while the Fitbit Air stayed on my left wrist, and this might have led the trackers to produce slightly different readings.

One area where the Fitbit Air clearly felt better to me, however, was the representation of the data collected overnight.

Fitbit's app actually won me over

I've said this before, and I'll say it again. While Whoop has become popular with casual users, it's still a product built primarily for athletes. That means the moment you open the app after waking up, you're greeted with a wall of numbers, graphs, and recovery metrics.

I can't believe I'm saying this, but I actually think Google has done a great job with the Google Health app that powers the Fitbit Air, even though plenty of Fitbit users might disagree with me.

I don't want to wake up and immediately analyze a dashboard full of metrics. Instead, Fitbit Air gives me a quick summary of how I slept, and for most mornings, that's all I need to know whether I had a good night's sleep or not. I also like that I can tell the app when I don't agree with how I'm feeling, rather than blindly accepting the data.

One thing I also noticed during my testing was how much faster Fitbit Air processes sleep data. Most mornings, it gave me my sleep summary within five to seven minutes of waking up.

The Whoop app, on the other hand, often took much longer. There were days when I didn't get my sleep report for nearly 30 minutes, and sometimes I even had to manually end the sleep session before it would process the data.

Verdict

Overall, I still think the Fitbit Air offers a better experience for the average user. Sure, the data differed from Whoop, but that's true of almost every consumer sleep tracker. None of these devices are clinical-grade after all.

After a week of wearing both trackers, I don't think sleep tracking alone is a good enough reason to spend significantly more on a Whoop. Once the Fitbit Air had a few nights to calibrate, its total sleep tracking was consistently close enough that I stopped paying attention to the differences.

What you're really paying the Whoop premium for isn't better sleep tracking. It has other features as well, like ECG, blood pressure insights, strain tracking, and a whole recovery ecosystem built for athletes. If those features matter to you, the subscription makes sense.

But if your main priority is simply understanding how well you slept each night, I honestly think the $100 Fitbit Air gets you most of the way there, with a friendlier app experience and for a fraction of the yearly cost.

More from Tom's Guide

• I used the Apple Watch and Whoop to track my sleep for a year — there's a clear winner for me
• I walked 3,500 steps with the Fitbit Air vs Fitbit Inspire 3 — and there's a clear winner
• Forget the Apple Watch: I use AirPods Pro 3 for Live Heart Rate Tracking while running

I must admit, as a wearable tech writer, I predicted that Fitbit would die under Google, which acquired the brand in 2021. I was wrong.

So, when the opportunity arose to sit down and chat with Jonah Becker — design director for wearables at Google — about the recently debuted Fitbit Air, I was a tad embarrassed. Fortunately, Jonah didn’t take my doomsday predictions personally, which is a relief given he’s been working on Fitbit products for over a decade.

Jonah started at Fitbit in 2016 and moved over to Google during the 2021 acquisition. He currently leads the industrial design teams behind the Pixel Watch, Pixel Buds, and, of course, Fitbit.

Our chat touched on the inspiration and design process behind the Fitbit Air (i.e., one of the best fitness trackers in 2026), the reason it doesn’t have onboard GPS, and the possibility of other Google-built screen-free wearables. I also got his candid thoughts on the outcome of the Google x Fitbit acquisition, five years on.

Inspired by his children's friendship bracelets

The Fitbit Air is a $99 screen- and button-free fitness tracker that doesn’t require a subscription and works with both Android and iOS devices. Incredibly lightweight and comfortable, it barely even looks like a piece of wearable tech, and that’s the point.

“The inspiration we had from the start was the friendship bracelet — the idea that you have this thing that is super lightweight, comfortable — it's not a typical fitness watch or fitness tracker,” says Becker. It’s “something that has a more casual, all-hours-in-the-day vibe. I would see my kids at summer camp; they'd put on a friendship bracelet and wear it for months on end until basically the threads went bare and they fell off.”

The beauty of the Fitbit Air is that all of the tracking technology is condensed into a small, bean-like object that can easily be popped in and out of bands for maximum customization. Google even released a hardware development kit allowing DIYers to design and 3D-print their own bands for the Air.

“There are a lot of creative people in the world who have unique situations, and the idea that it becomes something that people can have fun with," says Becker on the subject of creating your own straps for the Air. "You know, as long as it's working in a way that it's supporting their health, that's what's most important.”

A Whoop alternative for you and me

Of course, the Fitbit Air is far from the only screen-free fitness tracker out there. Its primary competition is the Whoop 5.0, a subscription-based tracker that’s big on heady training stats and recovery insights. Perfect for hardcore athletes and pros, the Fitbit Air is essentially the exact opposite.

While Whoop-wearers are less likely to need daily motivation to work out, the rest of us, well, could probably benefit from it.

"You have your high-tier athletes, and then you have like the other 99.7% of the population. There are a lot of people who don't have that motivation and guidance. So for me, it's like, that's where the real opportunity is, this broad population health."

As I noted in my review of the Fitbit Air, the device is basically a “Whoop alternative for the rest of us.” And after chatting with Becker, it seems that was the intention behind its development.

"I see [the Fitbit Air] as sort of the archetype of the ambient fitness tracker, the displayless tracker that's not demanding your attention. We have so many devices around us demanding our attention all the time, and at the same time, health is every hour of every day, seven days a week."

No GPS, no problem... for most people

It's worth noting that the Fitbit Air lacks onboard GPS, something I critiqued in the review, but why? According to Becker, the size, cost, and battery implications of including GPS didn’t align with the overall design intent of the Air.

Moreover, “the reality is that like 99% of people who might want to track a run or a hike or something like that are going to have their phones with them. So, having the paired GPS with the phone is going to provide a great experience,” adds Becker.

On the longterm outcome of Google’s Fitbit acquisition

Becker has the unique perspective of working on the Fitbit brand both when it was a standalone company and under Google. And much to my surprise, he revealed that Fitbit Air has been under development since shortly after the acquisition in 2021. That's a long time!

“To launch [the Fitbit Air] now feels in many ways like the first big move in delivering upon the promise of the acquisition,” admits Becker.

“I think one of the great things about Fitbit becoming part of Google is that Fitbit brings a ton of health expertise, history, brand recognition, and many years — a decade plus — of data collection, so an understanding of people's biometrics and behaviors,” says Becker. “And Google is a company that can probably do the best job in the world of making sense of all that data, and I think that's what it's really unlocked.”

What’s next for Fitbit?

All of this begs the question: Is the Fitbit brand actually here to stay? When I asked Becker, he was coy, but I picked up on a glimmer of excitement. So, I pushed further. "With word of a Samsung Galaxy Ring 2 under development, might we expect other screen-free wearables from Google in the near future?" I asked.

“I think we are seeing a really great reception to Fitbit Air, so it gives us confidence that we made the right decision in pursuing a screen-free form factor, and I, and I'll have to leave it at that.”

More from Tom's Guide

• Fitbit Air performance issues? 3 ways to make sure the Fitbit Air accurately tracks your next workout
• An ‘iPhone moment’ for your eyes — why Xpanceo is betting big on smart contact lenses as the future of AR
• I went to Sweden to watch bike helmets get smashed into anvils — 3 things I learned at the MIPS test lab

If you’re having issues with your Fitbit Air’s fitness tracking accuracy, I’m here to help. I just reviewed the Fitbit Air and have been wearing one pretty much nonstop for nearly a month. I’ve tested it against numerous other wearables, as well as Strava, while walking, running, hiking, and cycling with mostly impressive results.

Of course, shiny new pieces of consumer tech often ship with “quirks” — who could forget Apple's “Antennagate” — but with a growing number of Fitbit Air users reporting issues with fitness tracking accuracy via TikTok and Reddit, it’s worth rehashing the device’s technical limitations, along with some troubleshooting tips.

So, if you’re having issues with Fitbit Air fitness tracking accuracy, try these three things.

1. Manually start your workouts from the app; don’t use auto-tracking

The Fitbit Air’s auto workout tracking needs, well, work. At present, it only logs walks, bike rides, "sports," and "other activities." Moreover, you need to spend 15-20 consecutive minutes or more doing a supported activity for tracking to kick in. That’s hardly ideal.

For instance, I'm a beginner runner who averages about two miles per outdoor session. As a result, my runs tend to be shorter than 20 minutes, which means the Fitbit Air is hit-or-miss at automatically logging them.

Fortunately, the solution to this issue is simple: If you want to ensure the Fitbit Air actually records your workout, manually start a workout session for your activity of choice in the Google Health app (formerly the Fitbit app) before beginning.

2. For accurate daily step counts, carry your phone at all times

One of the biggest complaints I've heard about the Fitbit Air is that daily step count totals are far from accurate. However, there's a good reason this might be the case.

As a reminder, the Fitbit Air lacks an onboard GPS. This means you need to carry a paired smartphone with you at all times if you want precise daily step count totals, as the Air piggybacks off your phone’s GPS signal.

3. When tracking outdoor workouts, always bring your phone

Similarly, if you want accurate run, hike, walk, or bike data in your post-workout report, you must carry your phone along; otherwise, metrics like distance and pace will be far from accurate.

In my testing, you can start an outdoor-based workout from your phone, then leave it behind, and the Fitbit Air will try its best to measure location-based stats, but the results are faaaar from reliable. It’s also worth noting that there’s no onboard altimeter in the Fitbit Air. So, like GPS, the wearable relies on a paired phone, carried with you, for that info.

Ultimately, Google might be wise to add a warning in the Google Health app when users start an outdoor workout stating that a paired phone is required for accurate data.

Alternatively, Google could simply turn off all location-based metrics in the post-workout report when no GPS or altimeter info is available. If nothing else, this might help folks better understand the technical limitations of the Fitbit Air.

More from Tom's Guide

• I walked 3,500 steps with the Fitbit Air vs Fitbit Inspire 3 — and there's a clear winner
• I went for a run with the Fitbit Air and Garmin Forerunner 70 to see how the $99 tracker compared, and I’m impressed
• Fitbit Air vs Fitbit Inspire 3 — which $99 fitness tracker wins?

Amazon is full of sleep tracker deals this Prime Day, but it can be hard to know what's a good deal or what tech is worth buying. That's why we've rounded up every deal on every sleep tracker we've ever tested and loved, and that includes the Oura Ring 4 (now down to $226 at Amazon and £199.99 at Amazon UK)

The Oura Ring 4 may be our favorite sleep tracker, but it's not the only entry in our best sleep trackers guide to get a price drop this Prime Day. In this sleep-tracking deals hub we've included all the best Amazon discounts on top choices from Apple Watch, Garmin, Oura, Whoop, Withings, and Fitbit, all reviewed by the Tom's Guide team.

While Amazon's Prime Day event has, to be honest, been underwhelming in some areas, it definitely hasn't let us down in the sleep tech department. So, here's a list of the top five sleep tracker discount in both the US and UK, and why they're the best Amazon Prime Day mattress and sleep deals we've seen so far.

Don't forget your Prime Membership...

Top 5 sleep tracker US Prime Day deals

Top 5 sleep tracker UK Prime Day deals

Amazon Prime Day, excuse me, week, is hit or miss when it comes to the best tech deals, and this time around is no exception. That said, as a smartwatch and wearables expert, I’ve scoured Amazon far and wide to hunt down the five best deals so far.

For my beginner runners, the easy-wearing, feature-packed Garmin Forerunner 165 is nearly 50% off on Amazon. Meanwhile, the latest Apple Watch Series 11 is on sale for 30% off.

Find all details on these deals and my other favorites below.

Quick Links

• Fitbit Inspire 3: was $99 now $66 @ Amazon
• Fitbit Charge 6: was $159 now $85 @ Amazon
• Garmin Forerunner 165: was $249 now $129 @ Amazon
• Apple Watch Series 11: was $399 now $279 @ Amazon
• Garmin Instinct 3: was $449 now $299 @ Amazon

Best Prime Day 2026 smartwatch deals

We're tracking all the best Prime Day smartwatch deals

Amazon Prime Day is a great time to shop tech. While not all gadgets are good news for sleep (your smartphone could be what's robbing you of quality ZZZs), wearable tech from trusted brands certainly has a place in the bedroom.

Right now, you can save 48% on the Oura Ring 4 at Amazon and take 33% off the Fitbit Versa 4 at Amazon. These devices can help you learn more about your sleep habits and supercharge your rest this summer.

I've spent the past two years on the hunt for the best sleep trackers on the market, putting various watches, rings, armbands, and mats through our sleep tracker testing methodology, and recording their sale prices along the way.

That means a) I know what design elements, software, and sensors make a good sleep tracker, and b) I can spot a worthy deal when I see one. So, here I'm zoning in on the best tracker deals in current Amazon Prime Day sleep sales on both sides of the Atlantic right now.

Don't forget your Prime Membership...

Top 4 sleep tracker US Prime Day deals

From 48% off the world's top-rated smart ring (need we mention, it's the Oura Ring) to $38 savings on an up-and-coming, contact-free sleep monitor, here are the deals I recommend checking out if you're in America...

Top 4 sleep tracker UK Prime Day deals

For UK folk, the best Prime Day deals feature Oura (shock), Fitbit and Withings. Read on for all the deets...

The new Fitbit Air may be the talk of the town, but the Fitbit Charge 6 is actually a more competent health and fitness tracker thanks to onboard GPS and support for ECG readings. Better yet, it’s currently selling for the same price as the Fitbit Air.

The Fitbit Charge 6 is roughly the same size as the Fitbit Air but features a small AMOLED touchscreen. Normally priced at $159, you can score the Fitbit Charge 6 for just $99 via Amazon right now. That’s nearly 40% off retail and one of my favorite early Prime Day deals.

Epic Fitbit Charge 6 deal

One of the best Fitness trackers I've tested

The Fitbit Charge 6 may have arrived in late 2023, but it remains one of the best fitness trackers you can buy in 2026.

I frequently recommend it because it’s lightweight and comfortable, offers accurate health and fitness tracking insights, lasts nearly a week on a single charge, and has just the right amount of non-holistic smart features. These include support for Google Maps, Google Wallet, and mirrored smartphone notifications.

Plus, onboard GPS means you don’t need to carry a paired smartphone for location-based data when logging an outdoor workout.

How accurate is the Fitbit Charge 6’s fitness tracking performance? When I tested it versus the Apple Watch 10, a much pricier wearable, it proved nearly as precise. And versus the Pixel Watch 3, the Charge 6 bested its Google-built sibling. So, yeah, I’d say it’s pretty darn accurate.

The Fitbit Air and Fitbit Charge 6 are two of the best fitness trackers in 2026. But is one better than the other? That truly depends on your budget, the number of smart features, and the type of user experience you desire.

To help you better understand the differences between 2023's Fitbit Charge 6 and 2026's Fitbit Air, I've compared the two across five categories, including cost, design, health and fitness tracking features, smart features, and battery life.

Fitbit Air vs Fitbit Charge 6: Specs compared

Fitbit Air vs Fitbit Charge 6: Cost

The newer Fitbit Air is $99, while 2023's Fitbit Charge 6 is $159. However, the latter goes on sale frequently. For example, you can pick up the Charge 6 right now for just $99 via Amazon. That said, the Fitbit Air is consistently cheaper than the Charge 6, so it wins this category.

Winner: Fitbit Air

Fitbit Air vs Fitbit Charge 6: design

Both fitness trackers are lightweight, comfortable wearables with modest footprints. While the Fitbit Air is screen-free and button-free, providing a no-distractions health and fitness tracking experience, the Charge 6 offers a small 1.04-inch AMOLED touchscreen and haptic side buttons.

Does this make the Charge 6 a better tracker than the Air? That depends on whether you prefer a more-connected device capable of mirroring phone notifications and displaying stats, or one designed with a set-it-and-forget-it mentality.

Either way, the Charge 6 and Air each proved to be well-built in our testing, with respectable water resistance ratings of 50 meters. The Air is, of course, a bit more understated due to the lack of a screen; it's also a bit smaller. These factors don't necessarily make it a better-designed device, though.

Winner: draw

Fitbit Air vs Charge 6: Health and fitness tracking

The Fitbit Air proved to be a competent fitness tracker when pitted head-to-head against other popular wearables, like versus the Fitbit Inspire 3. However, it lacks onboard GPS, so you need to carry your paired phone to ensure metrics like distance, pace, and elevation gain are recorded accurately.

Not a fan of jogging with a bulky smartphone in your pocket? I feel you. In that case, the GPS-sporting Fitbit Charge 6 is going to be the better tracker for you.

The Charge 6 has other advantages over the Fitbit Air, most notably, the ability to record ECGs. When it comes to tracking workouts, both devices support over 40 modes with automatic detection and tracking for basic workouts like walks, runs, and bike rides.

Of course, thanks to its screen, users can manually start a workout on the Charge 6 with just a few taps, while Fitbit Air users will need to make a trip to the Google Health app on their paired phone.

Winner: Fitbit Charge 6

Fitbit Air vs Fitbit Charge 6: Smart features

This one isn't even close. When it comes to support for smart features, the Fitbit Charge 6 blows the Fitbit Air out of the water. However, the Charge 6 doesn't offer anywhere near the level of smarts you'll get from the best smartwatch models in 2026, like the Apple Watch Series 11 or Google Pixel Watch 4.

Still, the Charge 6 has NFC, so you can tap-to-pay using Google Wallet. It also supports a small selection of handy Google apps, like Google Maps and YouTube Music. There's no onboard music storage, but you can control media playback from your paired device.

The Charge 6 additionally mirrors smartphone notifications for both Android and iOS users.

Winner: Fitbit Charge 6

Fitbit Air vs Fitbit Charge 6: Battery life

The Fitbit Charge 6 is rated to last up to six days per charge on average, while the Fitbit Air is billed for up to seven days per charge. In my testing, both ratings proved accurate, making the Fitbit Air the winner of this category.

Winner: Fitbit Air

Verdict

When choosing between the Fitbit Air and the Fitbit Charge 6, the ultimate question to ask yourself is, "Do I want a screen-free and distraction-free fitness tracker or a more connected device?"

Put another way, the Fitbit Air is a wearable that you simply, well, wear and let it do its thing; the Charge 6 is one you interact with via a small touchscreen and haptic buttons.

Both are reliable, comfortable, and long-lasting. Of course, the Charge 6 has the advantage of onboard GPS, which is why I ultimately prefer it to the Air, along with NFC. But if you're not big on outdoor workouts or using tap-to-pay from this wrist, this may not matter much to you.

Overall winner: Draw

More from Tom's Guide

• Fitbit Air vs Fitbit Inspire 3 — which $99 fitness tracker wins?
• I tested all 3 Fitbit Air accessory bands — and there’s a clear winner
• I've been using the Fitbit Air for over a week, and my favorite feature has completely changed the way I wake up

Which $99 Fitbit fitness tracker is more accurate, the Fitbit Inspire 3 or the newer, screen-free Fitbit Air? Both devices performed admirably in our review test process, but is one more reliable than the other? I decided to find out.

On a picture-perfect cerulean Seattle summer day, I took one for the team and walked 3,500 steps with the Fitbit Inspire 3 strapped to my left wrist and the Fitbit Air affixed to my right.

How do I know I walked exactly 3.5K steps? I counted each and every one, clicking my trusty manual tally counter to note every hundred, before starting the count over at one.

While my manual count was a control for steps, I used the Strava app on my iPhone 16 Plus as a control for distance, pace, and elevation gain. Ultimately, one of these top-performing fitness trackers proved more competent. Was it the Fitbit Air or the Fitbit Inspire 3? Read on for the results.

Fitbit Air vs Fitbit Inspire 3: key differences

I’ve already gone in-depth concerning the pros and cons of the Fitbit Air vs. the Fitbit Inspire 3. But as a quick refresher, both wearables are compact and record the basics, like sleep quality, workouts, women’s health, and overall well-being.

The most notable difference: The Fitbit Inspire 3 has a screen — albeit a tiny one — for mirrored smartphone notifications, starting workouts, and viewing stats. The Fitbit Air, meanwhile, is screen-free and distraction-free.

They each cost $99, though the Inspire 3 is frequently on sale for less (It's just $79 via Amazon as of publishing). When it comes to logging outdoor workouts, like walks, neither has an onboard GPS, so you’ll need to carry your smartphone along (as I did) for accurate location-based metrics.

Now, on to the results of my 3,500-step walk test with the Fitbit Air vs the Fitbit Inspire 3.

I walked 3,500 steps with the Fitbit Air vs Fitbit Inspire 3

During my roughly 34-minute walk, I took exactly 3,500 steps. The Fitbit Air was more accurate, with a total that's off by just a single step. Strava, for what it's worth, noted a total of 3,510 steps.

The Fitbit Air recorded nearly the same total distance covered as Strava, while the Inspire 3 was off by nearly a third of a mile.

"The Fitbit Air's elevation tracking data has proven less than reliable in my testing, but at least the tracker provides the metric (unlike the Inspire 3)."

The Air's pace data is pretty darn close to Strava's. I didn't pause at any point during the walk, so I expected roughly the same pace from all three tracking methods. That may be the case for the Fitit Air, but not the Inspire 3.

Despite noting less distance covered, the Fitbit Inspire 3 recorded slightly higher heart rate data than the Air and more calories burned.

Fitbit Air vs Fitbit Inspire 3: Winner

The Fitbit Air is the clear winner of this head-to-head fitness-tracking accuracy showdown against its older sibling, the Fitbit Inspire 3.

Ultimately, the Air has newer hardware and represents the latest in Google's holistic tech. The Fitbit Inspire 3 may record most of the same metrics, but the Fitbit Air does so with better overall accuracy.

Which fitness trackers or smartwatches should I test head-to-head next? Let me know in the comments below.

More from Tom's Guide

• The Fitbit Air is basically just a screen-less Fitbit Inspire 3 — and that’s a very good thing
• I tested all 3 Fitbit Air accessory bands — and there’s a clear winner
• We asked Tom's Guide readers if they prefer the Fitbit Air vs. the Garmin Forerunner 70 — and the results were overwhelming

We asked Tom’s Guide readers which new fitness tracker they prefer, the screen-free Fitbit Air or the running-focused Garmin Forerunner 70, and your response was overwhelming.

With more than 800 total votes — 821 to be exact — one wearable proved far more popular than the other, receiving nods from 67% of respondents. So, which of these top-performing fitness trackers came out on top, the Fitbit Air or the Garmin Forerunner 70? Read on.

67% of TG readers prefer the Fitbit Air, but why?

We ran our “Which 2026 fitness tracker do you prefer, the latest Garmin or the newest Fitbit?” poll for two weeks, and the results speak for themselves. With all votes tallied, 67% of Tom’s Guide readers prefer the Fitbit Air to the Garmin Forerunner 70. But why?

For starters, the Fitbit Air is just $99, and the Garmin Forerunner 70 is $249, but that’s just one likely factor in the former’s popularity.

An even bigger reason folks prefer the Fitbit might come down to the target audiences. While the Garmin Forerunner 70 is designed with running enthusiasts in mind, the Fitbit Air is geared toward, well, anyone who’s looking for health and fitness insights from a no-fuss wearable.

Ultimately, the Forerunner 70 is a more niche product, while the Fitbit Air has more mass appeal.

Fitbit Air vs Garmin Forerunner 70: Biggest differences

I’ve already covered the core differences between the Fitbit Air vs Garmin Forerunner 70 in the intro to my 3,000-step walk test between the two (Spoiler alert: both performed with remarkable accuracy). But to summarize, the Garmin boasts more training and recovery tools, running features, and onboard GPS. It’s light on smart features but does offer mirrored notifications and media control.

The Fitbit Air, meanwhile, offers a well-rounded mix of holistic and fitness features with no screen, buttons, or ability to mirror notifications. It also requires a paired smartphone for location data when working out.

Ultimately, both the Fitbit Air and Garmin Forerunner 70 impressed me during testing, with each proving reliable, long-lasting, durable, and comfortable.

Haven’t voted in our Fitbit Air vs Garmin Forerunner 70 poll yet? Make your voice heard now, below.

More from Tom's Guide

• Garmin Forerunner 70 vs Forerunner 55: Here's how Garmin's new entry-level running watch stacks up against its predecessor
• I went for a run with the Fitbit Air and Garmin Forerunner 70 to see how the $99 tracker compared, and I’m impressed
• Fitbit Air vs Fitbit Inspire 3 — which $99 fitness tracker wins?

Which fitness tracker is better, 2026's Fitbit Air or 2022's Fitbit Inspire 3? Logic might suggest that the newer model has the advantage, but that's not necessarily the case.

I just reviewed the Fitbit Air and have worn a Fitbit Inspire 3 for several years, and there's plenty of good reason why both make our list of the best fitness trackers in 2026.

Here's how these two trackers compare head-to-head across six categories, including cost, design, customization, health and fitness features, smart features, and battery.

Fitbit Air vs Fitbit Inspire 3: Specs compared

Fitbit Air vs Fitbit Inspire 3: Cost

The Fitbit Air and Fitbit Inspire 3 each cost $99. However, the former is much newer and unlikely to see a discount anytime soon, while the latter goes on sale often for up to 30% off.

For example, as of writing, you can pick up the Inspire 3 for just $79 at Amazon.

Winner: Fitbit Inspire 3

Fitbit Air vs Fitbit Inspire 3: design

The Fitbit Inspire 3 and Fitbit Air are both small, comfortable fitness trackers that don't garner much attention or get in the way of daily life. However, the newer Air is both smaller and lighter than the Inspire 3 and offers a wider selection of band materials.

Neither wearable has physical buttons, but the Inspire 3 offers two haptic buttons on either side and sports a small AMOLED touchscreen. Depending on your ability to read tiny text and the daintiness of your fingers, navigating the Inspire 3's controls is a hit-or-miss affair.

Ultimately, I prefer the simpler, less-distracting design of the Fitbit Air to the fiddly controls and comically small screen of the Inspire 3.

Winner: Fitbit Air

Fitbit Air vs Fitbit Inspire 3: customization

The Fitbit Air is designed for maximum accessory customization. All of the tracking components and battery are contained within a small, pebble-like shell that can easily be popped out of one strap and swapped into another.

Google has a decent selection of accessory bands for the Fitbit Air available; I tried them all, and there's a clear winner. However, with a starting price of $34.99, I'm looking forward to more affordable third-party options popping up on Amazon and the likes, eventually.

The Fitbit Inspire 3 also supports band swapping, but removing and installing a band is a trickier process. That said, to my surprise, Google sells some pretty cool-looking Inspire 3 bands to replace the standard-issued ones.

Winner: Fitbit Air

Fitbit Air vs Fitbit Inspire 3: Health and fitness

The Fitbit Inspire 3 and Fitbit Air boast the same onboard tech, including sensors for tracking heart rate, blood oxygen saturation, movement and temperature. However, it's unclear whether the Air is using newer sensors or the same generation as the Inspire 3.

Either way, both devices keep tabs on your overall well-being, sleep quality, fitness, and women's health. However, neither sports an onboard GPS for location tracking data or an altimeter for elevation insights.

This means that you'll need to carry a paired smartphone along when working out to accurately capture metrics like distance, pace, speed, and elevation gain.

You also get automatic workout tracking for a small selection of common exercises, regardless of which tracker you choose. Meanwhile, more nuanced activities can be manually selected.

Winner: Draw

Fitbit Air vs Fitbit Inspire 3: Smart features

Neither of these fitness trackers offers much by way of smart features, but that's the point. Apps like Google Wallet and YouTube Music are reserved for the higher-end Fitbit Charge 6. You also won't find onboard storage for saving music on either.

The Inspire 3 can mirror smartphone notifications from Android or iOS devices on its tiny screen, but it's not a great user experience. Meanwhile, both wearables support Google's lovely Smart Wake haptic alarm feature. And that's a wrap for smart features.

Winner: Draw

Fitbit Air vs Fitbit Inspire 3: Battery life

Battery life is impressive with any tracker you choose, but the Fitbit Inspire 3 lasts a little longer than the Air. In our testing, the Inspire 3 easily meets the ten-day-per-charge threshold, while the Air effortlessly matches the advertised seven days per charge.

Winner: Fitbit Inspire 3

Verdict

In terms of performance, wearability, and cost, the Fitbit Air and Fitbit Inspire 3 are extremely similar. What sets them apart largely boils down to design. Simply put, the Inspire 3 has a small screen for starting workouts, viewing stats, and receiving mirrored smartphone notifications, while the Air does not.

Personally, I prefer the Fitbit Air's set-it-and-forget-it approach to wellness tracking, with no annoying controls or tiny screens to deal with. I admit, starting a workout session from the Google Health app is a tad annoying, and the Air's auto workout tracking needs... work, but the overall user experience of the Air feels more refined than that of the Inspire 3.

Of course, at the end of the day, they both log the same health and fitness insights.

Overall winner: Draw

More from Tom's Guide

• The Fitbit Air is basically just a screen-less Fitbit Inspire 3 — and that’s a very good thing
• I tested all 3 Fitbit Air accessory bands — and there’s a clear winner
• I've been using the Fitbit Air for over a week, and my favorite feature has completely changed the way I wake up

Which Fitbit Air band is best? I tried all three, and there’s a clear winner.

The screen-free and subscription-optional Fitbit Air is Google's answer to the Whoop 5.0 fitness tracker, and one of the best fitness trackers in 2026. Starting at $99, users can select from three strap types — though, more are in the works — including two woven options and one silicone.

I've been wearing the Fitbit Air for over a week and tested all three options, both while working out and hanging out. Here's how I rank them.

Third place: Fitbit Active Band

• Price: $34.99 or $99 with Fitbit Air
• Styles: Obsidian, Lavender, Berry, Fog
• Sizes: Small (130-175mm), Large (165-210mm)
• Material: Silicone

In third place, we have the silicone Fitbit Active Band, available in your choice of four colors, including Berry, shown here. This option is sold either kitted with the Fitbit Air for $99 or on its own for $34.99 via Google directly.

As far as rubbery/silicone straps go, this one is fairly soft on the skin; however, several factors detract from its appeal.

For starters, the Active Band is both thicker and less flexible than the woven strap options. It also secures to your wrist with a pin-and-buckle style system, so you can't make micro-adjustments for maximum comfort. That said, two sizes are available.

Finally, I'm not a fan of how silicone feels on my skin, in general, when I'm super sweaty. So, the Fitbit Active Band was never going to be my top choice.

Second place: Fitbit Performance Loop

• Price: $34.99 or $99 with Fitbit Air
• Styles: Obsidian, Lavender, Berry, Fog
• Size: One size (130-210mm)
• Material: Woven polyester and elastane fabric, stainless steel buckle

In second place, we have the Fitbit Performance Loop, which comes in the same four color options as the Active Band above. It's also priced at $34.99 from Google à la carte, or $99 with the tracker.

The Performance Loop is a woven textile strap made from a mix of polyester and stretchy elastane, with a shiny, stainless steel buckle. Available in one size, velcro allows for infinite micro-adjustments.

Overall, I found this strap to be quite comfortable; it's seriously lightweight, flexible, and anything but thick. However, the woven material is a bit slick, so the Fitbit's sensors occasionally slide from their ideal position, atop the wrist, when working out or just getting sweaty.

Fortunately, my favorite Fitbit Air band solves this issue.

First place: Fitbit Stephen Curry Loop

• Price: $129 with Fitbit Air
• Style: Orange and Rye
• Size: One size (130-210mm)
• Material: Woven polyester and elastane fabric w/ water resistant coating and silicone ribs, satin finish stainless steel buckle

The Fitbit Air Stephen Curry Loop is hands down the best accessory band for the device from a comfort standpoint. I also think the black, orange, and rye woven pattern looks really sharp; colleagues and pals tend to agree.

Unfortunately, at this time, Google isn't selling the Stephen Curry band on its own. The only way to secure one is to purchase the special edition Fitbit Air for $129.99; fortunately, while it's 'special edition,' it's not 'limited edition.'

This band uses the same woven material as the standard Performance Loop; however, Steph's version is treated with a water-repellent coating to make it more quick drying. In my testing, it dries extremely fast, even after a proper soaking in the shower.

The underside of the Steph Curry Loop features raised silicone ribs running parallel to the length of the strap. These not only increase airflow but also help secure the Fitbit Air in place on your wrist during physical activities.

Ultimately, I think the Steph Curry strap is worth the extra $30 compared to the others. Now I just wish Google would offer it in additional styles and à la carte. Even if they're $40, I'd probably pick up another. Any more than that, and I'll wait for a sale.

Which Fitbit Air strap do you prefer? Let me know in the poll below.

More from Tom's Guide

• I've been using the Fitbit Air for over a week, and my favorite feature has completely changed the way I wake up
• The Fitbit Air is basically just a screen-less Fitbit Inspire 3 — and that’s a very good thing
• Forget the Whoop 5.0 — The new Fitbit Air is a screen-less, subscription-free fitness tracker for the masses

I tested the fitness tracking performance of the Apple Watch SE 3 vs the Fitbit Air while walking exactly 4,500 steps, and I'm surprised by the winner.

The Apple Watch SE 3 is Cupertino's latest entry-level, full-featured smartwatch and one of the best cheap smartwatches of 2026. The Fitbit Air, meanwhile, is a brand-new, diminutive, screen-free wearable and one of the best fitness trackers available right now.

Both devices track tons of workout types and deliver similarly detailed post-effort insights, but which one is more reliable? To find out, I walked 4,5000 steps while wearing the Apple Watch SE 3 on my left wrist and the Fitbit Air on my right. As a primary control for tracking accuracy, I manually counted my steps, noting every hundred taken with a click of my trusty tally counter.

I also logged my efforts using the Strava app on my iPhone 16 Plus as a control for distance, pace, and climb data. So, which wearable came out on top, the Fitbit Air or the Apple Watch SE 3? Read on.

Fitbit Air vs Apple Watch SE 3: fitness tracking accuracy compared

Before jumping into the results, it's worth noting some of the primary differences between these two popular wearables. For starters, the screen-less Fitbit Air is designed to be a distraction-free tracker with no notifications or smart features (except just one).

On the other hand, the Apple Watch SE 3 is essentially the opposite: an ultra-connected smartwatch that does much more, in terms of smart features, than just track health and fitness stats. The SE 3 is also considerably pricier than the Air, starting at $249 compared to $99 for the latest Fitbit.

Finally, the Apple Watch SE 3 sports onboard GPS for location tracking without a paired smartphone; the Fitbit Air does not. That said, when you do carry your smartphone while logging an outdoor workout with the Air, fitness tracking performance is excellent.

Now, on to the test results!

Fitbit Air vs Apple Watch SE 3: Walk test results

I logged exactly 4,500 steps (manual count) during my roughly 40-minute walk around a gloomy Seattle, Washington, including a climb up the city's steepest hill. And much to my delight, both wearables logged similar step counts that fall well within a reasonable margin of error; ultimately, any tally within 100 steps of my actual count is considered an impressive outcome.

However, while the Apple Watch SE 3 is just 37 steps of my actual total, the Fitbit Air is off by just 12 steps. Strava, meanwhile, bested them both, logging 4,502 steps.

Distance data is similarly enough across the board, with Fitbit Air proving slightly more in line with the control data. However, the Air's climb data leaves a lot to be desired. The SE 3, in contrast, noted just a bit more uphill effort than Strava.

Thanks to the gloom, I encountered little traffic, which meant that I didn't stop moving at any point during this walk. As a result, I expected my average pace to be pretty similar across the board, which it is. However, Apple's pace calculation is closer to the control than Fitbit's.

Similar to my prior walk test with the Fitbit Air vs Garmin Forerunner 70, the former's heart rate data is noticeably lower than the competition's. This is a somewhat odd result, given that the Fitbit Air's heart rate tracking performed admirably time and again during testing for the review, regardless of which wrist I wore it on.

One possible theory for the discrepancies: I didn't wear the Air tightly enough during my last two walk tests.

Fitbit Air vs Apple Watch SE 3: Winner

Despite the Apple Watch SE 3 costing 2.5x the Fitbit Air, Google's humble, screen-less fitness tracker wins this showdown. However, the SE 3 performed nearly as well when it comes to step count and was more accurate across the board for other key metrics.

Which fitness trackers, smartwatches, smart rings, etc. would you like me to test head-to-head next? Let me know in the comments below.

More from Tom's Guide

• I walked 3,000 steps with the Fitbit Air vs Garmin Forerunner 70 — and I’m seriously amazed by the results
• The Fitbit Air is basically just a screen-less Fitbit Inspire 3 — and that’s a very good thing
• I spent one week with a wallet-friendly Garmin Forerunner 970 dupe — 5 things that stand out about the $300 cheaper Amazfit Cheetah 2 Pro

The Fitbit Air is one of the best fitness trackers in 2026, especially if you prefer a screenless and distraction-free wearable with long-lasting battery and rock-solid reliability.

Priced at $99, with all major health, sleep, and fitness metrics available subscription-free, the Fitbit Air is also the best budget-friendly Whoop alternative, and my favorite fitness tracker of 2026 so far.

With no screen, buttons, NFC, or mirrored smartphone notifications to distract you, the Fitbit Air offers just one feature I’d consider to be truly ‘smart.’ More importantly, this feature has totally changed the way I start my day.

No smart alerts or distractions… except this one

In theory, the Fitbit Air could alert you to an incoming phone call, text message, or any other notification. However, by design, the onboard haptic motor is only capable of vibrating when you set an alarm from the sleep tab in the Google Health app (formerly the Fitbit app).

This is by no means a new or groundbreaking feature for wearables in 2026; plenty of the best Fitbits and many of the best smartwatch models offer something similar. However, I’m a little surprised but genuinely pleased that Google included hatpic feedback with the brand’s latest Fitbit.

Users can save up to eight alarms total. When one goes off, the tracker gently vibrates for roughly 30 seconds before going into snooze mode. This delays the alarm for exactly nine minutes (and can’t be changed) before it goes off again.

Not only is this a lovely, non-startling way to wake up — and one I’ve fully adopted — but unlike a standard audible alarm, the Fitbit Air alarm doesn’t wake my sleeping partner, or even my dog, Belverdere.

To silence the Fitbit Air’s haptic alarm, firmly double-tap the top of the tracker. From my experience, this works the first time, roughly 90% of the time.

The brilliance of ‘Smart Wake’

In addition to a haptic alarm, the Fitbit Air also supports Google’s ‘Smart Wake’ feature, which, when activated, prioritizes waking you during your optimal sleep stage, i.e., when you’re not in deep sleep or REM.

When switched on, Smart Wake will wake you up to 30 minutes before your actual alarm, but never after.

Some room for improvement

It’s worth noting that I’m a reasonably light sleeper, and even though the level of vibration offered by the Fitbit Air’s alarm is more than enough to get my eyes open, it may not be enough to awaken more hardcore snoozers.

My suggested solution for Google: Add a new function that lets users adjust how much the Air vibrates when the alarm goes off, with three levels to select from.

Have you ever tried waking up via haptics on a fitness tracker or smartwatch? What was your experience? Let me know in the comments below.

More from Tom's Guide

• Garmin’s screen-less Whoop competitor could cost five times as much as the Fitbit Air
• The Fitbit Air is basically just a screen-less Fitbit Inspire 3 — and that’s a very good thing
• Forget the Whoop 5.0 — The new Fitbit Air is a screen-less, subscription-free fitness tracker for the masses

I tested the fitness tracking performance of the new Fitbit Air versus the (also) new Garmin Forerunner 70, and was seriously amazed by the results.

The Fitbit Air is a screen-less, wallet-friendly alternative to the Whoop 5.0, while the Garmin Forerunner 70 is the brand’s latest entry-level running watch, replacing the beloved but aging Forerunner 55.

To find out which of these 2026 wearables is the more accurate fitness tracker, I walked 3,000 steps with the Garmin on my left wrist and the Fitbit on my right. As a primary control for this head-to-head, I manually counted my steps (with some help from my trusty, old-school tally counter). Additionally, I logged my walk using the Strava app on an iPhone 16 Plus.

Fitbit Air vs Garmin Forerunner 70: fitness tracking accuracy compared

Before diving into the results, it’s worth noting some key differences between these two devices. For one, the Garmin Forerunner 70 is $250 on Amazon and other major retailers, which is more than twice the cost of the $99 Fitbit Air.

Both wearables offer their primary health and fitness tracking features without a subscription. Want personalized insights, trend reports, workout recommendations, and more? Google Health Premium for the Fitbit Air is $9.99 a month or $99 for the year, while Garmin Connect+ is $6.99 a month or $69.99 annually.

The other notable difference is that the Garmin Forerunner 70 sports an onboard GPS while the Fitbit Air doesn’t. This means you'll need to carry your smartphone for location and elevation data when tracking an outdoor workout with the Air, something that isn’t the case for the Forerunner 70.

Now, on to the test results!

Fitbit Air vs Garmin Forerunner 70: Walk test results

Any step count total within one hundred steps of my actual tally is considered a fantastic result by TG walk test standards. For this head-to-head, the Fitbit Air and Garmin Forerunner 70 were both within just five steps of the actual tally, a seriously amazing outcome. Strava, meanwhile, logged 3,006 total steps taken.

Distance data also lines up nicely across the board, with Fitbit's tally being just a tad closer to the control. The Fitbit Air also delivered a more accurate elevation gain total than the Garmin Forerunner 70, which notably lacks a barometric altimeter for tracking climb data (the Air piggyback's off your phone's altimeter just like it does for GPS).

While Strava and Garmin each provide moving and elapsed pace metrics, the Fitbit Air only offers one, and doesn't specify which it is (my money is on the latter). The figures above reflect Garmin and Strava's elapsed pace. For moving pace, Strava noted 17 mins 15 secs per mile, while Garmin logged 17 mins 35 secs.

Fitbit's average heart rate metric is quite a bit lower than Garmin's — the Fitbit was on my right wrist and the Garmin on my left, which could be a factor — but both wearables recorded roughly the same max heart rate for the walk, which notably included some extra-steep terrain to get my blood pumping.

Fitbit Air vs Garmin Forerunner 70: Winner

And the winner is... both wearables! This one is a tie, as both the Air and Forerunner 70 were within four steps of my actual count.

Ultimately, the Fitbit Air is one of the best fitness trackers you can buy in 2026, and while I'm still reviewing the Garmin Forerunner 70, there's a solid shot it's destined for our best Garmin watch guide as well.

This is to say, top-notch performance is not only what I hoped for from these two modern wearables, but also what I expected. And both delivered with flying colors.

More from Tom's Guide

• Garmin just added WhatsApp support to a huge number of watches — here’s how to unlock it
• The Fitbit Air is basically just a screen-less Fitbit Inspire 3 — and that’s a very good thing
• I spent one week with a wallet-friendly Garmin Forerunner 970 dupe — 5 things that stand out about the $300 cheaper Amazfit Cheetah 2 Pro

I just reviewed the Fitbit Air, and it’s safe to say that it’s destined for our best fitness tracker buying guide. But, is it the best fitness tracker for you?

That depends on factors like your holistic and fitness monitoring needs, budget, and desire for smart features. With that in mind, here are five reasons to buy the Fitbit Air and two reasons to skip it.

Buy: The price (it’s cheap)

The Fitbit Air is just $99 with no subscription costs for core health and fitness tracking insights. However, a Google Health Premium subscription for $99 a year or $9.99 a month unlocks all sorts of heady AI-backed holistic tools and trend deep dives.

Not a subscription person? Google includes three months of Google Health Premium free with your purchase, so that you can try those premium features first before making a commitment.

Buy: All-day comfort

The Fitbit Air is the smallest and lightest screen-free fitness tracker of its kind, with a footprint that’s 35 x 17 x 8 mm and a weight of only 5.2 g without the strap. By comparison, the Whoop 5.0 weighs a wrist-crunching 26.5 g.

The straps for the Fitbit Air are also noticeably slimmer than the competition’s offerings, making the Air one of the comfiest trackers I’ve tested, particularly on the special edition Stephen Curry knit strap.

This also makes the Air an excellent choice for sleep tracking insights, especially if you’re like me and seriously loathe anything bulky on the wrist while snoozing.

Buy: Accurate health and fitness insights

I tested the Fitbit Air’s tracking performance against the Garmin Forerunner 70, a $250 entry-leving running watch, and the Strava app, my go-to for logging any outdoor workout.

After comparing the data from a 3,000-step walk and a 1.5-mile run, the results proved decisive: the Fitbit Air is as competent and reliable a wearable for measuring heart rate and metrics like speed, pace, and distance during outdoor workouts as the far pricier Garmin.

Buy: Distraction-free tracking

One of the biggest selling points of the Fitbit Air is what it doesn’t have: there’s no screen, no buttons, no mirrored smartphone notifications, and basically, no distractions to slow you down.

The device does have a built-in haptic motor that can be used to gently and silently wake you using the Fitbit’s Smart Alarm, but that’s essentially it for smarts.

Buy: Long-lasting battery

Google promises up to seven days of battery from the Fitbit Air, and that’s been exactly my experience while testing it. After seven consecutive days wearing the device pretty much 24/7, I had roughly 15% battery remaining.

Considering just how lightweight the Air is, a week of battery is darn impressive. It also recharges rather quickly, going from 0 to 100% in about 90 minutes.

Skip: A lack of GPS

I mentioned accurate fitness tracking performance, but there’s one caveat: the Fitbit Air lacks an onboard GPS for location tracking data, so you’ll need to carry your paired smartphone for insights into distance, pace, etc, along with a post-effort map.

The Air additionally lacks an onboard altimeter for elevation tracking data, but worry not! Your smartphone also has one of those, too.

Skip: No smart features

Finally, if you’re the type of person who prefers a screen, buttons, smart features, and optional smartphone notifications, the Fitbit Air isn’t for you.

Instead, I recommend taking a look at the Fitbit Charge 6, which is similar in size but with a screen, NFC payments, and other useful smarts. A little pricier than the Air at $159, it also sports onboard GPS.

More from Tom's Guide

• Garmin’s screen-less Whoop competitor could cost five times as much as the Fitbit Air
• The Fitbit Air is basically just a screen-less Fitbit Inspire 3 — and that’s a very good thing
• The Fitbit app is officially dead — but don’t panic, its replacement is even better

What happened to the Fitbit app? After an epic 14-year run, the Fitbit app is officially dead. But don't shed a tear just yet, because the new Google Health app that replaces it is better in just about every way.

That's right, the Fitbit app is now the Google Health app, and Fitbit Premium is now Google Health Premium. Pricing for the Premium subscription remains the same: $9.99 a month or $99 annually.

New name, same basic app, better design

The new app was built based on feedback from longtime Fitbit wearers, and organizes everything into four cour tabs: Today, Fitness, Sleep, and Health. Rather than inundating users with numbers and graphs, the most relevant wellness metrics are presented front and center.

Of course, users can customize the dashboards on each page to their heart's content. Available for both Android and iOS, the new Google Health app plays nicely with a ton of other popular health and fitness apps, like Run Club, AllTrails, MyFitnessPal, and the Oura app.

A new 'Leaderboard' feature lets users compete in fitness challenges head-to-head with friends and family, which is somewhat ironic, given the fact that Google nixed a similar community challenges feature from the Fitbit app back in 2023.

What does this mean for Premium subscribers?

As noted above, Fitbit Premium is now Google Health Premium. The price is the same, but your subscription now unlocks a whole lot more.

With the launch of Google Health Premium, Google's AI-powered, personalized health and fitness concierge officially moves out of beta and becomes a full-blown part of the Premium experience.

When I tried Google's AI fitness coach back in November — which started with a casual conversation about my health and fitness goals — I was impressed. And the Coach has only gotten better over time. What exactly does it do? The Coach can generate custom workout plans, suggest daily exercises, help you eat and sleep better, generate all sorts of trend reports with actionable insights, and much more.

Other new features for Premium users include the ability to upload medical records, giving the Google Health app an even more complete understanding of your wellness. Google says that this data is encrypted end-to-end and that users have complete control over their data privacy.

How to update from the Fitbit app to Google Health

Google started rolling out the new app last week, on May 19th.

If you search for the Fitbit app in the Apple App Store or Google Play Store, you'll likely be redirected to the 'Google Health (Fitbit)' app instead.

For folks who already have the Fitbit app downloaded, simply update your app to the latest version to unlock the newer Google Health layout and expanded features.

The Fitbit name lives on elsewhere

As noted in the intro, there's no need to pour one out for the Fitbit brand just yet. While the Fitbit app may be dead, the brand lives on via the outstanding and affordable ($99) new Fitbit Air, a screen-free, long-lasting wearable that's nothing but a pleasure to use.

Read my complete Fitbit Air review, and stay tuned for a full review on the new Google Health app, including the premium features.

More from Tom's Guide

• Garmin’s screen-less Whoop competitor could cost five times as much as the Fitbit Air
• The Fitbit Air is basically just a screen-less Fitbit Inspire 3 — and that’s a very good thing
• Forget the Whoop 5.0 — The new Fitbit Air is a screen-less, subscription-free fitness tracker for the masses

Good things should be worth the wait. After all, the legendary neo-soul recording artist D’Angelo kept us waiting 14 years for his third and arguably most groundbreaking album, Black Messiah. Google hasn’t made us wait quite as long for a new Fitbit model; the last Fitbit designed for adults debuted in 2023 — the Fitbit Charge 6 — while the latest entry-level addition to the lineup, the Fitbit Inspire 3, launched in 2022.

Thankfully — and much to my surprise — Google’s Fitbit draught ended in early May with the debut of the ultra-petite, screen-free, and subscription-optional Fitbit Air.

Priced at just $99, the Fitbit Air is designed to be a set-it-and-forget-it, ultra-discreet health tracker with 24/7 heart rate monitoring, detailed nightly sleep reports, basic fitness tracking, recovery recommendations, women’s health tracking, and perhaps most notably, zero buttons or smart features.

I tested the Fitbit Air for over a week, and I may never take it off. The Fitbit Air is easily the best no-fuss, bang-for-your-buck, screen-less fitness tracker on the market in 2026. That's right, forget the more advanced, serious-athletes-only, wallet-draining Whoop 5.0, here’s why I’ll be recommending the Fitbit Air to users far and wide for the foreseeable future.

Fitbit Air: Specs compared

Fitbit Air value: 5/5

• At $99 and subscription-free for core features, the Fitbit Air is one of the best value screenless trackers available in 2026
• An optional Google Health Premium account unlocks personalized AI-backed health and fitness insights, along with deeper dives into your holistic trends; it's $9.99 a month or $99 a year
• Cost-wise, the Fitbit Air is the same price as 2022's entry-level Fitbit Inspire 3 tracker, which is still sold by Google (but often for $79); the Air is less than the GPS-sporting Fitbit Charge 6 ($159)

The Fitbit Air is $99, the same price that the Fitbit Inspire 3 debuted at in 2022. This may have you thinking that the Air replaces the Inspire 3 in the brand's lineup, but that's not the case. Google will continue selling the Fitbit Inspire 3 for $79-$99 and the Fitbit Charge 6 for $159 for the foreseeable future.

The Fitbit Air will set you back $99 paired with one of Google's standard silicone or kniy straps or $129 paired with the special edition Stephan Curry strap (which I'm a big fan of, more on that below).

Compared to the competition, the Fitbit Air is the same price as the Amazfit Helio Strap and half the price of the Polar Loop, both of which are also subscription-free. The Fitbit Air is additionally less than half the price of the cheapest annual Whoop subscription.

Speaking of subscriptions, some of the more advanced features, like AI-backed recommendations and trend insights, require a Google Health Premium (previously Fitbit Premium) subscription for $9.99 a month or $99 for the year; full review of that coming soon.

Ultimately, the Fitbit Air ships with a three-month trial to Premium to help you decide whether those additional features are worth it to you, something I appreciate.

Fitbit Air value: 5/5

Fitbit Air design and comfort: 5/5

• The Fitbit Air is smaller, lighter, and more comfortable than the competition
• Better water resistance than Whoop 5.0
• Designed to be swapped from strap to strap with ease
• The special edition Stephen Curry strap is the comfiest of Google's initial offerings

The Fitbit Air doesn't have a screen or any buttons; however, it does have a haptic motor, which can be set to vibrate for a limited number of use cases, most notably as a way to gently and silently wake you up via Google's Smart Alarm function. You cannot set it to vibrate to alert you to incoming texts, calls, or other smartphone notifications.

The Fitbit Air is noticeably smaller, thinner, and lighter than all of its competitors, including the Whoop 5.0, Polar Loop, and Amazfit Helio Strap.

Weighing just over 5 g and with a tiny footprint, the Fitbit Air is not only extremely comfortable, especially on the special edition Stephen Curry strap, but it also doesn't really resemble a fitness tracker... like, at all. Instead, it looks more like a sporty bracelet than a tech gadget.

Water resistance is 50 meters, which beats the pants off the Whoop 5.0, and should be enough to protect the Air during short surface-level swims, showers, hand-washing, etc.

The tracker itself is nothing more than a small plastic pebble with some sensors and charging contacts on the underside. However, because it's protected by the strap, it's nearly impossible to damage the tech components, even if you slam your wrist unintentionally into a wall.

Customization is a big selling point of the Air. The tracker itself, which looks like a slimmed-down Inspire 3 without straps, pops with delightful fashion in and out of its housing with a firm push.

Google is selling a fairly wide selection of straps, starting at $34.99, in all sorts of eye-catching colors. Choose from sporty silicone or stretchy knit fabric. Meanwhile, wallet-friendly, third-party straps have yet to materialize on Amazon and the likes, but give it time.

It's worth calling out the Steph Curry strap, because it feels a lot more premium, breathable, and less scratchy than the standard knit strap Google offers with the device for $99.

Health tracking: 4/5

• Lots of sleep tracking insights on par with the best fitness trackers and best smartwatches
• User-friendly app for tracking holistic trends like resting heart rate, average calorie burn, step count, heart rate variability, menstrual cycles, and daily readiness
• Some health tracking features require a Google Health Premium subscription, like AI-analyzed sleep trend recommendations (via Google Coach)

The Fitbit Air sports an onboard continuous heart rate tracker, blood oxygen saturation (SpO2) reader, and body temperature sensor for keeping tabs on all your core holistic metrics, including heart rate variability trends, breath rate, cardio load, and daily readiness, a numeric score out of 100.

For a $99 wearable, the Fitbit Air provides detailed sleep reports on par with some of the best smartwatch models in 2026, with insights into your sleep duration, time spent in sleep cycles, restlessness, and daily sleep quality rating and score, also out of 100.

I tested the Fitbit Air against the Garmin Forerunner 70 nightly for a week straight. The chart above shows recent results, logged during the same night from each tracker. While the data doesn't match perfectly, the results are pretty darn close across the board, suggesting that the Fitbit Air is just as capable of logging sleep quality as a device 2.5 times its cost.

Google completely overhauled the Fitbit companion app, now called 'Google Health,' and the results are an easy-to-navigate experience with quick and easy access to whatever metrics you value most — the app is highly customizable — along with just the right amount of context and analysis to prove useful but not overwhelming.

Fitbit Air fitness tracking: 3/5

• Reliable fitness tracking performance when you carry a paired smartphone for location and elevation data
• Auto workout mode only starts tracking after 15 minutes and is limited to a handful of common exercises
• Similar heart rate tracking reliability to entry-level Garmin watches; no apparent performance differences between tracking on left vs right wrists
• Personalized AI-backed adaptive fitness plans require a Google Health Premium subscription

Like nearly every screen-less wearable, the Fitbit Air lacks an onboard GPS for location data and an altimeter for elevation insights. This means that you'll want to carry your paired smartphone when performing outdoor workouts for the Air to piggyback off of, to ensure reliable distance, pace, and elevation gain metrics.

The Fitbit Air automatically tracks a small selection of workout types, including walks, bike rides, 'sports,' and 'other activities.' It does so whether you carry your paired phone or not, but there's a catch. For an activity to be auto-logged, you have to do it for at least 15 consecutive minutes.

I'm a newbie runner who jogs roughly 1.5 miles several times a week. That often takes me less than 15 minutes, which means that I have to manually open the Fitbit app on my phone and start a running workout session to ensure the Air actually logs it. This is less than ideal, IMHO, and Google should instead lower the auto workout threshold for the Air to five minutes instead.

The selectable tracking modes for the Fitbit Air in the app are also somewhat limited compared to the competition, with just 41 to choose from. For example, there isn't even a pickleball mode!

When carrying a paired smartphone, fitness tracking performance from the Fitbit Air is top-notch. I walked 3,000 steps — manually counted — with the Fitbit Air vs Garmin Forerunner 70 vs Strava running on an iPhone 16, and the Air proved just as accurate across the board as the others (though its pace data was a little sluggish).

To ensure similar heart rate tracking capabilities on either wrist, I performed 50 jumping jacks with the Air on first on my left and then on my right wrist (giving time for my heart to return to a resting rate in between). I also wore the Garmin Forerunner 70 on the opposite wrist of the Air during testing for an additional data set. The results: The Fitbit Air tracks your heart rate with similar reliability to Garmin's top entry-level smartwatch, regardless of which wrist you wear it on.

In addition to testing the Fitbit Air while walking and doing aerobic workouts, I also tested it against Garmin and Strava while going for a 1.5-mile run. In this test, the Air's results once again line up nicely with the competition.

Of course, for the most valuable insights into your fitness trends, you'll want to take Google Health Premium for a spin, which notably unlocks Google's Gemini-backed 'Coach,' a personalized, holistic concierge that is far more helpful, in my testing, than Apple's 'Workout Buddy' or Samsung's 'Running Coach.'

For example, after a week of less-than-ideal sleep and more workouts logged than normal, the Coach not only advised I take it easy, but also gave me targets for how much sleep to get in the next few nights, low-key workout suggestions that target muscle groups I didn't utilize in recent days, and big picture advice based on my fitness goals and recent performance.

Fitbit Air battery life: 4/5

• The Fitbit Air lasted over a week in my testing, meeting its advertised rating
• It also recharges quickly: 0 to 100% in roughly 90 minutes
• Whoop 5.0 boasts double the battery life of the Fitbit Air

The Fitbit Air is rated to last up to seven days per charge. After exactly one week of testing the Fitbit Air on my wrist, I still had 15% battery remaining. During my time wearing the device, I recorded around a dozen workouts and only took the tracker off while showering.

Google says you can fully recharge the Air from 0% to 100% battery in roughly 90 minutes, a claim that also proved true in my testing.

Sure, the Whoop 5.0 offers double the advertised battery life of the Fitbit Air, but it also weighs roughly five times more. Besides, a week of battery is more than enough in my opinion, especially when you consider that some of the best smartwatch models only last for one day per charge... cough, cough, Apple Watch 11.

Fitbit Air review: Verdict

I tested the Fitbit Air for a week, and I have no intentions of taking it off anytime soon. In fact, it's hands down my favorite screenless, subscription-free tracker on the market today and a great choice for anyone looking to learn more about their health trends without breaking the bank or straining their wrist. In short: It's a Whoop 5.0 for the rest of us.

Smaller, lighter, and overall more comfortable than alternatives from Whoop, Amazfit, and Polar, it may not have the best-in-class battery life, but at over a week per charge, it's good enough for me. While you'll find more in-depth fitness tracking insights from the best GPS sport watches, the Fitbit Air covers all the basics well, even if the auto-workout tracking could use refinement and an expansion of exercise types.

Ultimately, the combination of a completely distraction-free user experience, an affordable price, reliable holistic features, excellent comfort, impressive battery life, and no subscription requirement all add up to the Fitbit Air being my new favorite fitness tracker in 2026, and a wearable I'll be recommending to all sorts of wellness and fitness enthusiasts.

Fitbit Air final score: 21 out of 25

I’m currently reviewing the new Fitbit Air, and after four days wearing it, I’m already obsessed.

While the Fitbit Air is far from the most advanced fitness tracker on the market today — it doesn’t even have a screen or onboard GPS — a $99 price tag, playful design, and simple-to-use disposition make it a potentially compelling choice for wrists far and wide.

With that in mind, these are the three biggest reasons why I’m smitten with the new Fitbit Air, so much so that it just might be my favorite wearable in 2026, at least, so far.

1. Accessibly priced; plays well with others

The Fitbit Air is accessibly priced at $99. That cost covers the tracker and one band; additional straps start at $34.99 via Amazon and come in a wide range of colors, and your choice of silicone or woven knit.

Speaking of accessible, the Fitbit app… excuse me, the Google Health app (new name) plays nicely on both Android and iOS devices, offering users the same experience regardless of their OS preference; how democratic!

2. Subscription and distraction-free tracking

With no screen and no buttons to get in your way, not to mention a diminutive footprint (more on that below), the Fitbit Air is the antithesis of wearables like the Apple Watch 11, the Samsung Galaxy Watch 8, or the Google Pixel Watch 4, and that's the point!

There’s also no NFC for mobile payments, no speaker or microphone for taking calls, and ultimately, nothing to distract you from living in the moment.

Additionally, unlike other popular screen-free trackers aimed more at advanced athletes, most notably the Whoop 5.0 and MG, the Fitbit Air is subscription-optional. So, aside from the cost of the device itself, you never need to shell out any additional cash to make use of its primary tracking features.

That said, Google does offer an optional subscription plan for the Fitbit Air and Pixel Watch series called Google Health Premium (previously called Fitbit Premium). Priced at $9.99 a month or $99 for the year, a subscription unlocks all sorts of additional holistic tools, perhaps most notably, access to the tech giant’s new personalized wellness ‘Coach’ that turns your health data into surprisingly actionable insights.

3. Easy-wearing and addictively customizable

After roughly four days with the Fitbit Air on my wrist, I can say with certainty that this thing is comfortable as heck, a sentiment shared by my colleague Jane McGuire. Not only that, it barely resembles a piece of nerdy wearable tech; rather, it looks more like a stylish little bracelet, depending on which strap you opt for. I’m currently rocking the slick, limited-edition Stephen Curry jawn, and I’m hooked.

It’s also addictively easy to pop the little tracker out of the strap housing and swap it into a different setup. This is, of course, intentional on Google’s part. The idea is to make it easy for users to match their Air strap to their outfit or mood.

The official Google Fitbit Air straps start at $34.99, but I don't doubt that cheaper, third-party options will start popping up on Amazon in the coming weeks and months. When that happens, you can bet I’ll be purchasing a variety to test out.

What do you think of the Fitbit Air? What features are you most impressed with (or not), and are you considering buying one? Let me know in the comments below.

More from Tom's Guide

• I just spent 36 hours with Garmin’s new entry-level watch for runners — 5 things to know about the Garmin Forerunner 70
• I just ran my first 5K — 5 practical ways I conquered my pre-race nerves for a strong finish
• I tested the $79 Amazfit Bip 6 vs the $249 Apple Watch SE 3 — and the cheaper smartwatch is a lot better than I thought

I review wearable tech for a living, and while some folks, myself included, predicted the death of the Fitbit brand at the hands of Google in 2026, much to my delight, the tech giant just came through with the shiny new Fitbit Air.

Priced at $99, this diminutive fitness tracker focuses on the basics, like monitoring your daily movement, workouts, sleep quality and women’s health. There’s no GPS, so you’ll need to carry your phone for location data, no NFC for mobile payments and no onboard storage for music.

But, wait a minute, that sounds a whole lot like 2022’s entry-level Fitbit Inspire 3, which also costs $99 (but can easily be found for less, like this Inspire 3 Amazon deal for $84). So, is the Fitbit Air essentially just a Fitbit Inspire 3 without a screen?

I’d argue that it is, but that’s actually a very good thing. Here’s why.

Did we really wait four years for a screen-less Fitbit Inspire 3? Yes and no.

The Fitbit Inspire 3 was my very first fitness tracker, which I purchased shortly after its 2022 debut. Well-priced and offering more than enough features for my fitness and health-tracking needs at the time, it was the little tracker I ultimately grew attached to and wore daily for years.

However, the Inspire 3, which is still technically a current fitness tracker in Google’s lineup, wasn’t without its faults. For one, the screen is tiny, and the controls are rather fiddly. This makes it a poor choice for folks with larger hands or those who struggle to read teeny-tiny text.

The Fitbit Air is the natural successor to the Inspire 3, but it’s better in lots of ways

Ultimately, the Fitbit Air is the natural evolution of the entry-level Inspire line. Sure, Google could’ve slimmed down the Inspire 3 case, slightly expanded the screen size, and even given the Inspire 4 physical controls, but I’m glad that didn't happen, especially since the Fitbit Charge 6 still exists.

Instead, Google took the screen-free, distraction-free approach, mimicking the experience you might get with a Whoop 5.0 and Oura Ring 4, but without the recurring subscription costs.

I applaud this because with each passing year, it feels harder and harder to escape the siren sounds of our hyper-connected world. Was that the case in 2022 when the Inspire 3 debuted? Sure, but in 2026, folks (including yours truly) seem more eager than ever to disconnect from the endlessness of information inundation.

And thanks to the lack of a screen or buttons, the Fitbit Air encourages just that, letting you tune out the digital noise, all while still tracking essential wellness and fitness metrics.

It's worth noting that the Fitbit Air and the Fitbit Inspire 3 boast similar health tech, consisting of an optical heart rate sensor, accelerometer, gyroscope, blood oxygen sensor and skin temperature sensor. Smart features are also all but non-existent on either, though the Inspire 3 does mirror smartphone notifications.

Those similarities aside, the Fitbit Air has the advantage of being more comfortable on the wrist thanks to a smaller and lighter footprint. It’s also built around customization; the tracker pops out of the straps with a firm push, letting you change up the vibe and re-accesorize at a moment’s notice. A huge number of strap options are already available, starting at $34.99 via Amazon.

Of course, comfort and customization aren't nearly as big selling points as the Fitbit Air’s distraction and control-free disposition. Stay tuned for my full Fitbit Air review, coming soon!

More from Tom's Guide

• Garmin’s screen-less Whoop competitor could cost five times as much as the Fitbit Air
• Garmin Forerunner 70 vs Garmin Forerunner 170 — what are the main differences between Garmin’s two new running watches
• I tested the $79 Amazfit Bip 6 vs the $249 Apple Watch SE 3 — and the cheaper smartwatch is a lot better than I thought

Take a look at our best Garmin watches guide and you'll probably find exactly the kind of sports watch or fitness tracker you're looking for. Unless, of course, you want one without a screen.

Screenless fitness trackers like the Whoop 5.0 and Oura Ring 4 seem to quietly be on the rise — Fitbit has just unveiled the Fitbit Air, and now it seems Garmin isn't far behind.

A Ukrainian retailer appears to have accidentally leaked the upcoming "Garmin Cirqa" screenless tracker. Spotted by Notebookcheck, this leak suggests the black tracker will be a low-key screenless fabric band available in two sizes: S/M and L/XL.

As expected, the Garmin Cirqa will monitor heart rate and passively document metrics like steps and calories, as well as sleep quality. So far, so good. But let's talk about that price.

A high price for minimalism

According to the listing (which, at time of writing, is still live), the most eye-catching thing about this minimalist piece of fitness tech is the price. It states the Garmin Cirqa will be available for 22,399 Ukrainian hryvnia, which roughly translates to $507 / £379. That's already more expensive than either the Oura Ring 4 ($349) or the Fitbit Air ($99). And if you throw in a $6.99 per month Garmin Connect+ membership, it gets even more pricey.

Whoop, which arguably started the screenless trend, doesn't charge up front for the band, but users still need to pay between $199 and $359 a year for an active subscription. So if this listing does prove to be true — and the pricing is carried across — Garmin is planning to release the most expensive screenless tracker on the market.

The natural caveats are all in place: this is an unconfirmed leak, and pricing could easily change in different regions. But at a time when many of us are trying to save as much as possible when it comes to our tech, it would be a bold move for Garmin to launch with a price so much higher than market rivals.

More from Tom's Guide

• Upgrade your run with these 12 best running apparel picks on Amazon under $100
• Garmin Forerunner 70 vs Garmin Forerunner 170 — what are the main differences between Garmin’s two new running watches
• Forget the Whoop 5.0 — The new Fitbit Air is a screen-less, subscription-free fitness tracker for the masses

It’s been nearly three years since we got a new Fitbit model (excluding the kid-centric Fitbit Ace LTE). That all changes today with the introduction of the Fitbit Air, a $99 screenless and subscription-free tracker with a simple-to-use disposition, a week of battery, and basic sleep, workout, and holistic insights.

While the popular, screen-less Whoop 5.0 tracker is targeted toward hardcore athletes, the Fitbit Air is designed to appeal to just about anyone.

Here’s everything you need to know about the new Fitbit Air, including availability, onboard tech, features, and outlook.

Fitbit Air: price and availability

The Fitbit Air is available for preorder starting today for $99, with units expected to ship by the end of May. That price includes the tracker itself and one swappable band. Additional bands — they come in a huge range of styles — start at $34.99.

Google is also offering a special edition Stephen Curry strap for the Fitbit Air that’s designed for “increased airflow,” and looks pretty darn snazzy.

The $99 Fitbit Air additionally includes a 3-month trial to Google Health Premium (previously called Fitbit Premium).

It’s also worth noting that the Fitbit Inspire 3 and Fitbit Charge 6 will remain in the Fitbit catalog for now.

Fitbit Air: Design

The Fitbit Air has no screens or buttons, but an onboard motor provides haptic feedback for alerts; it can also be used to gently and silently wake you up via Fitbit’s Smart Wake feature. The polycarbonate housing sports only a status lamp, which illuminates when the device is charging.

With dimensions of 1.4 x 0.7 x 0.3 inches and a weight of just 12 g (sans strap), the Fitbit Air truly lives up to its name. Google says it’s the brand's smallest tracker ever, with a footprint that's 25% smaller than the Fitbit Luxe. Despite the plastic housing, water resistance is a respectable 50 meters.

Designed so that you can easily swap one band for another, the selection of strap options at launch is seriously vast, with a wide range of both silicone and textile options to choose from.

Fitbit Air: Health and fitness features

The diminutive Fitbit Air sports an optical heart rate sensor, accelerometer, gyroscope, SpO2 sensor, and skin temperature sensor. It’s worth noting, however, that the latter is less sophisticated than the skin temperature sensor found in the latest Pixel Watch 4.

The Air can detect several potentially deadly conditions, including atrial fibrillation (AFib). It also monitors heart rate variability and can autodetect a small selection of common workout types, like walking, running, cycling, and swimming.

In addition to the auto-tracked workouts, the Fitbit Air supports a wide range of other exercises. You’ll just need to manually select those prior to your workout using the companion app.

There’s no onboard GPS in the Fitbit Air, so you’ll need to bring along a paired smartphone for location and elevation data when working out outdoors.

When it comes to sleep tracking, the Fitbit Air provides all the insights you’d expect, like how much time you spent in each sleep stage, your total sleep time, any signs of restlessness, and a numerical sleep score out of 100. It can also autodetect naps as brief as 20 minutes.

Fitbit Air: Battery life

Google says that the Fitbit Air battery should last for up to seven days per charge, which is impressive. Charging the device from 0% to 100% takes just 90 minutes, and users can get a full day of juice from just a five-minute charge.

Similar to other Fitbit models, a magnetic charger with metal contacts attaches to the underside of the device.

Fitbit Air: Outlook

I predict the Fitbit Air appealing to lots of folks, given its $99 price tag and the fact that the core features are completely subscription-free. While it lacks some of the higher-end sensor tech found in the Whoop 5.0, namely onboard GPS and an altimeter, I don’t think that will be a dealbreaker for most users.

I also love the fact that Google is prioritizing the ability to quickly and painlessly swap out one strap for another to match your mood or outfit. While $34.99 is a tad pricey for a watch strap, I’m confident that cheaper third-party options will become available sooner or later.

Google is also making it easy for Pixel Watch owners to seamlessly swap back and forth between their smartwatch and a Fitbit Air for tracking purposes. So, if you’re like me and hate wearing a smartwatch to bed, the Fitbit Air could be an excellent nighttime tracking alternative to the chunkier Pixel Watch 4.

One more thing: The Fitbit app is now the Google Health app

One more thing! In addition to debuting the Fitbit Air, Google is now officially changing the name of the Fitbit app to the Google Health app. Similarly, Fitbit Premium is now Google Health Premium, which still costs $9.99 a month or $99 for the year.

This change will begin rolling out on May 19th via an app update. Current Fitbit app users won’t need to download a new app; rather, the update will automatically change the name of the app, import all of your data, and present everything in a new, slicker format.

Available for both Android and iOS, the new app is built around four core tabs: Today, Fitness, Sleep, and Health, with a major emphasis on user customization. It also plays nicely with tons of other popular fitness apps, including Nike Run Club, AllTrails, MyFitnessPal, and the Oura app.

A new feature lets users securely upload medical records to the app for an even more complete view of health. For peace of mind, all health data is encrypted end-to-end.

Additionally, a new “Leaderboard” feature in the app lets you compete with friends and family in fitness challenges, like who can get the most steps in a given timeframe.

Finally, Google is bringing its AI-powered, personalized fitness training tool, the "Coach," out of beta and making it available to all premium users. The Coach can help you set fitness goals, generate workout plans, improve sleep quality, and even custom-tailor daily workouts based on the weather.

More from Tom's Guide

• Fitbit is exiting the cheap smartwatch race — and this brand could replace it
• The Oura Ring 5 is coming — and these are the 5 biggest upgrades I’m hoping to see
• 5 reasons why I sometimes still wear a 'dumb' watch

Fitbit has been a Google brand for roughly five years, and in that time, the big ‘G’ has shuttered the Fitbit smartwatch range, killed some of the best Fitbit community features, and even removed useful apps, like Google Assistant, from still-support devices.

Outside of the Fitbit Ace LTE — a wearable designed with kids in mind — there hasn’t been a new Fitbit since 2023’s Fitbit Charge 6. That could all change in the next few months, as rumors of a new Fitbit model reach a fevered pitch. There is, however, a slight catch.

Here’s everything we know so far about the rumored Fitbit Air, including possible features and design, a potential launch date, price, and more.

Fitbit Air — Biggest rumors

• First teased in early April 2026 by U.S. basketball star Steph Curry
• Rumored to be a screen-less wearable similar to the Whoop 5.0
• Images suggest a lightweight design, possibly available in a range of colors and strap types, including a woven material
• Likely to offer basic workout, movement, and sleep tracking features
• Battery life could exceed two weeks
• Tipped for a mid-May 2026 debut
• Possible $99 launch price; likely subscription-free for core features

Fitbit Air — Possible price and release date

According to an insider report from 9to5Google, the Fitbit Air could debut as soon as May 16th with a launch price of $99. That's the same cost as the entry-level Fitbit Inspire 3.

More importantly, unlike the biggest player in the screenless, wrist-based tracker market, Whoop, Google will likely offer most of the Fitbit Air's core features without a subscription fee.

By comparison, the Whoop 5.0 is either $199 to $349 annually, depending on how extensive you want your training insights. That said, the device itself is technically free with a subscription commitment.

Fitbit Air — Rumored design

Based on the images shared on Steph Curry's Instagram, the Fitbit Air appears to be a diminutive tracker on a woven cloth strap, and a somewhat similar design to the Whoop 5.0.

According to retail info first reported on by DroidLife, the Fitbit Air could be available in a wide range of strap types and styles, including both cloth, silicone, and mesh metal options, with colors like 'Obsidian,' 'Lavender,' and 'Berry' on offer.

Fitbit Air — Possible features

Given the rumored $99 price tag, the Fitbit Air will probably offer fairly basic fitness and health tracking insights, including a range of workout tracking modes, sleep and recovery insights, daily movement tracking with reminders, heart health insights, and women's health tracking.

That said, given the fact that it's being backed by a famous pro athlete, it's entirely possible that the device is capable of more advanced fitness training tools, advice, and metrics. Those, perhaps, will be locked behind some sort of monthly Google Health subscription.

No word on battery life, but the lack of a screen should result in solid longevity. The Whoop 5.0, for example, lasts for two weeks per charge. I reckon Google will aim to match or beat this rating with the Fitbit Air.

Fitbit Air vs Garmin ‘Cirqa’ vs Whoop

Google isn't the only major consumer tech brand evidently hungry for a piece of the Whoop pie. Reports suggest that Garmin is also working on a subscription-free fitness tracker to rival the Whoop 5.0, possibly named the Garmin Cirqa.

Like the Fitbit Air, the Garmin Cirqa is also tipped for a summer 2026 debut. The question is, will these likely budget-friendly wearables be direct competitors to the seemingly pro athlete-level Whoop? Or, will they be more targeted to the traditional fitness tracker crowd?

My money is on the latter. However, the fact that Google is clearly going to launch the Fitbit Air with the endorsement of a world-class athlete throws a bit of a monkey wrench into that prediction.

Ultimately, I can't quite get over the fact that in 2026, the biggest innovation we're talking about in wearable technology is the lack of a screen. It's almost as if 2015 called and wants its fitness trackers back.

More from Tom's Guide

• Fitbit is exiting the cheap smartwatch race — and this brand could replace it
• The Oura Ring 5 is coming — and these are the 5 biggest upgrades I’m hoping to see
• 5 reasons why I sometimes still wear a 'dumb' watch

Google has trailed the launch of a new screenless fitness tracker, with Steph Curry giving us a sneak peek of the new device on his Instagram account.

In the video, Curry is seen wearing the screenless grey and orange band, which he describes as the ‘first of its kind’ before saying he won’t spoil it.

Bloomberg reports that the band will come with basic features and that you’ll need a Fitbit Premium subscription to unlock its full capabilities.

That the new tracker will be launched under the Fitbit brand is interesting because Google has seemingly been winding down Fitbit products over the past couple of years.

This would be a major new launch that leans on Fitbit’s background in fitness tracking, and it could be the first screenless band to really rival Whoop, which has been dominant in this area of the market.

Why Fitbit can take on Whoop

Several screenless bands have hit the market over the past year, with the most notable Whoop rivals being the Amazfit Helio Strap and the Polar Loop band.

Neither has really dented Whoop’s popularity as yet. The Helio Strap is a good budget alternative but lacks the name recognition of Whoop, while the Polar Loop is undermined by poor software and hasn’t proved to be that accurate in my testing either.

Whoop has also been successful in blocking the sale of some rivals, like the Lexqi band, and has sued Polar for ‘copying’ its design, something Polar firmly denied when we asked them for comment.

A Google/Fitbit band wouldn’t have any problems with name recognition or its app. Fitbit remains one of the biggest names in fitness tracking tech, and the Fitbit app is easy and enjoyable to use, which is vital with a screenless band when you rely on the app to see all your data.

Showcasing the band on the wrist of Steph Curry is also a notable move because Whoop has always benefited from having a lot of partnerships with elite athletes across a range of sports.

Athletes don’t get much bigger and more recognizable than Curry, and if Google is smart, they’ll have other pros lined up to show off wearing the band.

It promises to be a big year for screenless trackers, with rumors of a Garmin band continuing to swirl as well. We’ll test any new bands as soon as we can to see if they really are a compelling Whoop alternative.

More from Tom's Guide

• Not the Fenix 9 — this is the new Garmin watch I want to see in 2026
• Coros Pace 4 vs Coros Pace 3 vs Coros Pace Pro: Which is the best Coros watch for you?
• Garmin Fenix 8 vs. Garmin Fenix 8 Pro: should you upgrade?

2025 was an exciting year for wearable tech. Oura dropped a new smart ring, Apple updated every Apple Watch model in the lineup, Samsung brought back the clicky bezel for its flagship Galaxy Watch and lots of revolutionary new safety tools debuted—including hypertension detection (Apple) and loss of pulse detection (Google).

So, what does 2026 have in store for wearable devices? It’s time for me to once again gaze into the consumer tech crystal ball (I just updated the firmware) and make predictions for the year ahead.

With that in mind, here are the potential product drops I’m most excited for in 2026, from likely-to-launch models to total Hail Marys.

Apple Watch Series 12

You can bet your bottom dollar that Apple will debut a new Apple Watch Series 12 come fall, 2026. The Cupertino kid has maintained this release schedule for the brand’s flagship smartwatch for eleven years straight; the Apple Watch Series 11 is the latest installment.

With the wallet-friendly SE and rugged Ultra series refreshed every two to three years — and I don’t expect a new version of either for 2026 — this frees up Apple to focus solely on the Series 12.

Ultimately, the jump from the Apple Watch Series 10 to the Series 11 is a minor one. The newer model sports the same case design and display, with better battery life, slightly tougher screen protection, optional 5G (vs. 4G-LTE), and not a whole lot else.

This leads me to believe that the Series 12 might represent a more significant update, akin to the jump from the Series 9 to the Series 10, which brought about a new, sleeker case design, faster charging, and a better display.

Rumors on the Apple Watch Series 12 are fairly thin as of writing, but upgraded health tracking tools, a more efficient and potentially brighter display, onboard Apple Intelligence features, and improved battery life are all possible.

Fitbit Charge 7

I’ve got to be honest, up until a few months ago, I really thought Fitbit was as good as dead. However, reps from the brand casually mentioned new Fitbit models for 2026 during a press briefing on the latest AI-powered, personalized Fitbit Premium features (the Fitbit app is also the default workout app on the Pixel Watch range).

With Google also acknowledging the end of the road for Fitbit-branded smartwatches, the new models will likely come in the form of traditional fitness trackers.

Despite debuting in 2023, the Fitbit Charge 6 remains the best fitness tracker available today, and gosh darn is it due for a refresh. Not only would such a move make my job as a wearables reviewer much easier — I recommend the Charge 6 frequently, but with the caveat that it's long in the tooth — it would likely keep the Fitbit name at the forefront of the best fitness tracker convo for the foreseeable future.

As far as features, rumors are far and few between. So, here’s what I’m hoping for in a Fitbit Charge 6: Improved battery life that lasts well over a week, an onboard altimeter for precision elevation data, dual-band GPS for better location tracking, onboard music storage, and a larger, brighter display… all in a similarly-sized package. Oh, and some additional smart features would be nice.

Fitbit Inspire 4

The other likely Fitbit candidate due for a refresh is the Fitbit Inspire 3, which debuted all the way back in 2022. This is Fitbit’s most entry-level, wallet-friendly option. It’s also the lightest, easiest-wearing Fitbit in the lineup.

Like a potential Charge 7, leaks and insider details on the Fitbit Inspire 4 amount to little. So once again, here’s what I’m wishing for: a larger and brighter screen, onboard GPS (even if it’s only single-band), support for NFC payments, onboard music storage, and a similarly affordable price to the Inspire 3 ($99).

Samsung Galaxy Ring 2

The Samsung Galaxy Ring is roughly a year-and-a-half old. One of my top choices in our best smart ring guide, unlike the wearables above, there are a number of Galaxy Ring 2 rumors floating around, some more believable than others.

Potential upgrades include a thinner and more comfortable design, significant battery life gains, an onboard body temperature sensor, improved tracking accuracy, all sorts of new AI-based personalized training tools, and an expansion of the sizes.

As of writing, the Samsung Galaxy Ring is the closest smart ring to beating the Oura Ring 4. No doubt, Samsung is eager to jump ahead of the competition with its follow-up device. With that in mind, if we do get a Galaxy Ring 2 in 2026, I’m betting it will be a fairly hefty upgrade.

Apple Ring

Okay, now we’re officially in ‘probably not going to happen’ territory, but a wearable tech journalist can dream. Rumors of an Apple Ring have been circulating since before I was of legal drinking age (I’m 37). Over the year, Apple has filed all sorts of patents that seem to hint at a potential finger-based wearable.

The question is, are these patents being filed as a purely defensive move, or do Tim Cook and Co. actually have intentions to one day drop an Apple smart ring? I obviously cannot say; my crystal ball only sees so much.

If we do get an Apple Ring in 2026, and that’s an ‘if’ the size of the Burj Khalifa, it could be pretty darn cool. From gesture controls and an onboard voice assistant (here’s hoping for an AI-powered Siri) to advanced fitness-focused tools and seamless integration with all your other Apple products, I’d be first in line to try the Apple iRing.

What wearable technology launches are you most hoping for in 2026? And what are some features that might convince you to upgrade from your current wearable? Let me know in the comments below.

More from Tom's Guide

• Google Exclusive: How the Pixel Watch 3 got a life-saving feature the Apple Watch can't match
• 5 smartwatch and smart ring predictions for 2025 — Apple Watch Ultra 3, Samsung AR glasses and more
• I test smart rings — 5 battery maintenance tips to avoid catastrophe

If the idea of a 20-minute chat with an AI fitness coach makes you feel a little uneasy, you're not alone. This is why I initially shrugged when Google first mentioned its forthcoming Fitbit 'Coach' feature, powered by Gemini AI, during this summer's launch of the Pixel Watch 4.

In the past 12 months, nearly every smartwatch and smart ring maker has rushed to incorporate shiny new AI tools within their companion apps, supposedly with the goal of creating a more personalized and informative user experience. However, from my experience testing these new features so far, none really live up to the hype.

At best, AI-based wellness assistants are able to surface your holistic metrics when called upon and provide slightly better-than-common-sense answers to queries. Some, like Apple's Workout Buddy and Samsung's Running Coach, can even create customized workout routines for basic activities like running.

What is 'Fitbit Coach'?

Fitbit Coach aims to take things a step further with highly specific and adaptive training plans based on a user's goal, abilities, equipment, personal preferences, and current health trends. It's also a 24/7 chatbot, supposedly with the ability to answer genuinely complex questions.

Currently available to Fitbit Premium subscribers ($9.99 a month/$79.99 a year) as a not-fully-flushed-out preview, Google has lofty ambitions for Fitbit Coach. On the user end, the onboarding process starts with a long, personal chat with 'The Coach.'

Despite my hesitations, I fired up the Fitbit app on my Pixel phone and dove headfirst into the wild west of AI-powered fitness training.

Here are the five biggest things that surprised me about the Fibit Coach onboarding process.

1. The whole process was surprisingly conversational

When I first demoed Fitbit Coach, Google reps recommended that I complete the onboarding process via dictation using my standard conversational voice. The questions during the process are presented via a text chat, and indeed, you can type your answers in. However, I found pressing the small microphone and dictating my answers made everything feel more natural.

The Gemini-powered Coach responds via text with an upbeat and encouraging tone. The goal of the onboarding is for your Coach to get an understanding of your current health status and goals, and then parlay that into a customized weekly fitness plan.

The first thing the Coach asks is what kinds of workouts you currently enjoy. I was admittedly pretty rambly in my answer; however, the Coach was able to parse my key points without any issue, possibly better than a human might.

2. I spoke to the Coach for nearly 20 minutes

Google says the onboarding process takes an average of fifteen minutes. Time must fly when you're talking about personal wellness, because I clocked my onboarding at just under 20 minutes. As noted above, I definitely rambled a bit in my answers and jumped back and forth between topics. None of this caused any hiccups with the Coach understanding my abilities and fitness habits, though.

After asking about your current workout routines and preferences, the Coach then inquires about your fitness goals. For this, I said that my primary goal was to prep my legs for extra stamina come snowboard season. I also expressed a desire to incorporate more short bursts of cardio into my work days, along with additional dumbbell-based workouts to tone my upper body.

'No problemo,' said the Coach.

3. Goals are now weekly, rather than daily

Since the dawn of the fitness tracker, daily step count and physical activity goals have been the norm. That will no longer be the case for Fitbit and Pixel Watch users. Google is moving away from daily goals and instead placing an emphasis on weekly ones.

Rather than stressing about 'closing your Rings' on a daily basis, as Apple Watch users are accustomed to, Fitbit/Pixel Watch owners will now be encouraged to look at their wellness through the lens of a rolling seven-day period.

This change, which is already in place within the new Fitbit Premium preview, will ultimately make its way to all users, including non-Premium ones, with an app relaunch set for early 2026.

4. My Coach-generated workout plan is well varied

Once you complete your onboarding with the Coach — which ends with a question about any health conditions or concerns — it takes about 20 minutes for the Coach (Gemini) to generate your personal workout plan.

When mine was finally ready, I gave it a quick look over and was nothing short of impressed. As requested, the workouts are varied day-to-day, considerably. On Wednesday, I was instructed to do a 'leg endurance builder' workout, which consists of a mix of Goblet Squats, Step-ups, and Forward Lunges.

Thursday is a 'quick cardio and upper body toning' day, with a thorough list of ten exercises to complete. On Friday, my focus is on quick, aerobic walking to help with stamina. Saturday is for glute and quad endurance.

5. Adjusting workouts is as simple as chatting with the Coach

If I'm not feeling one of the suggested workouts or it's outside of my abilities, I can simply 'chat' with the Coach and ask for an alternative workout at any given time, or simply remove the workout from my routine with a few taps.

Also of note, several of the exercises recommended by the Coach are new to me. Fortunately, there are visual demonstrations with explainers for each.

While I've only begun scratching the surface of what the new Gemini AI-powered Fitbit Coach feature is capable of — this is my first week following the training plan — I'm already cautiously optimistic about how useful, and not-creepy-robot-like the whole experience is.

Stay tuned for a deeper dive into the Fitbit Coach preview.

More from Tom's Guide

• The best Fitbit for tracking your health: Expert tested and rated
• The future of wearable wellness tech: 5 wild predictions for 2035 according to experts and industry leaders
• Samsung Galaxy Watch 8 vs Google Pixel Watch 4 — which flagship Android watch wins?

Maybe the Fitbit brand isn’t dead after all? During a press preview of the revamped Fitbit app last week, Fitbit’s head of product, Andy Abramson, nonchalantly hinted at new Fitbit hardware launching in 2026.

This came as a bit of a surprise, given Google’s penchant over the past few years for slowly sucking the life out of the Fitbit brand.

Since acquiring Fitbit, Google has shuttered the Fitbit Sense and Versa smartwatch lines, ended support for Google Assistant across the Fitbit ecosystem, nixed popular Fitbit community features like challenges, and shuttered Fitbit.com, all while harvesting the best Fitbit technology and metrics for the Pixel Watch line.

So, excuse me for thinking Fitbit was as good as dead. Here’s everything you need to know about potential new Fitbit models in 2026, along with details on the new Fitbit app.

A new Fitbit model is long overdue

Aside from the kid-centric Fitbit Ace LTE launched in 2024, we haven’t seen a new Fitbit model since the debut of the Fitbit Charge 6 all the way back in October 2023. In the world of wearable tech, two years might as well be an eternity.

While the Fitbit Charge 6 remains my top pick as the best Fitbit in 2025, its age is starting to show; for example, the screen feels downright tiny by today's standards. The same can be said for the wallet-friendly Fitbit Inspire 3, which debuted in September 2022.

The question is, when Google says new Fitbit hardware is coming, does that mean an update to an existing Fitbit model, or an entirely new Fitbit form factor? My money is on the former.

2026 Fitbit upgrade predictions

Though new Fitbit models may be relegated to kid-friendly devices only, I’m hopeful that 2026 will bring us a proper replacement for the Fitbit Charge 6. What might a Fitbit Charge 7 offer? My best guess is a larger and brighter display, a better GPS, the addition of an altimeter for elevation tracking, improved battery life, and possibly new health sensors and safety features!

A Fitbit Inspire 4 will likely similarly offer a larger screen that’s easier to interact with and updated holistic features. That said, I doubt the Inspire series will gain a GPS, as that’s one of the biggest differentiators between it and the Charge series.

Refreshed Fitbit app with AI coaching

In addition to new Fitbit hardware in 2026, Fitbit is also rolling out a completely overhauled Fitbit app, and you can take a preview of the new app for a spin starting on October 27.

Most notably, the new Fitbit app seamlessly integrates a Gemini-powered AI wellness coach into a more visually appealing platform with friendlier graphs, more intelligently organized data, and enhanced user customization.

While non-premium users will benefit from the aesthetic improvements, the AI coach is only for Premium users. However, it’s not just for hardcore athletes; rather, the feature is designed to get to know you and help you improve your physical fitness, no matter your skill level or workout goals.

For now, the overhauled app preview is only available for U.S.-based Fitbit Premium subscribers using an Android device. iOS folks will need to wait until “later this year” to take the new personalized AI features for a spin.

It’s also worth noting that Premium users will ultimately have the choice to opt in or out of Google’s new AI coach feature. Those who choose to opt in will be presented with a five to ten-minute “onboarding chat” with the coach, where, using natural language, you share your current workout habits and goals, favorite physical activities, any injuries, gear, motivations, ect.

Once complete, your new Fitbit AI coach is supposed to help come up with workout plans that suit your proclivities, while providing advice, insights, and motivation along the way.

Stay tuned for a deeper dive into the new AI-powered Fitbit app, including takeaways from the onboarding chat and a verdict on its overall usefulness.

More from Tom's Guide

• I test smart rings — 5 battery maintenance tips to avoid catastrophe
• I just went hands-on with the Suunto Vertical 2 — and it beats my favorite Garmin in 5 big ways
• Apple Watch finally gets a sleep score — here's how to unlock yours

Fitbit may be a brand that's far less at the forefront of people's minds since Google started killing off certain Fitbit features after acquiring the company for $2.1 billion in 2021.

But the fitness tracking company is far from dead. In fact, it just released a huge sleep tracking update that changes the way it scores your sleep.

And it turns out the changes are actually lowering user scores. It's by design, as the new changes are meant to be more accurate. In most cases, it appears that Fitbit was scoring too high previously, so the new metric is intended to level things out and bring the scores into a more accurate range.

But that doesn't mean users of the best Fitbits are happy about it.

What's happening with Fitbit's sleep tracking?

More from Tom's Guide

• Samsung Galaxy Fit3 vs Fitbit Inspire 3: Which budget fitness tracker should you buy?
• I tracked skiing with a $99 smartwatch — here’s how it compares to my $450 Garmin
• Under $100 smartwatch test: I walked 5,000 steps with the Amazfit Bip 5 vs Armitron Matrix — here’s the winner

Fitbit services were down for quite some time this morning, and the company acknowledged a "major outage" that's currently listed as having "Functionality back to normal."

This comes following over 2,000 outage reports on Down Detector, and people claiming they are unable to access services on the app. Those reports have dropped precipitously, getting below 500, which is a clear indicator that the outage is over.

We covered the outage live to determine what went wrong and the steps taken to fix the problem.

Fitbit was down — live updates on the outage

That's a big spike

The amount of reports started to grow at 12pm BST (7am ET), and has only been growing since.

The company acknowledges a major outage.

Fitbit status page

Fitbit posted on its status page that "We're experiencing a major outage." At the moment, the company says an "Investigation in progress," so it's in the early phases.

Hopefully, that doesn't mean it'll take too long for it to be fixed so users can get their workouts going again.

A small drop, but still going

We've seen a small drop in reports on Down Detector, indicating that fewer users are jumping on the service to say they're having issues. It doesn't necessarily mean the outage is over, as Fitbit hasn't said anything about a fix coming just yet.

No progress on Fitbit's end

It's still showing as investigating on the status page, so we'll have to wait until the company has any news to report.

Users trying anything

Users on Down Detector are reporting having tried a bunch of troubleshooting steps before realizing that Fitbit as a whole is down.

When something that usually works isn't working, it's always a good idea to see whether there's an outage hitting it before wasting a bunch of time with other steps. When there is an outage, it's out of your control anyway, so all you can do is sit back and wait.

Mobile App and Web API

Fitbit's status pages list the outage as officially affecting its Mobile App and Web API, which are two of the service's more critical aspects. The syncing issue some users experienced early this morning appears to have been resolved; however, without the mobile app and API, many Fitbit functions remain unusable.

A big decline, still down officially

We've seen reports drop to the 900 range on Down Detector, which is a massive decrease from the 2,200 at which it peaked. However, on Fitbit's status page, it still indicates an outage in progress, so it's difficult to say whether Fitbit is being cautious with its reporting that things are fixed or if users are simply not reporting issues as frequently.

Either way, keep your browser pointed right here, as we'll bring you any new information as it emerges.

Fitbit in the UK seeing a similar pattern

The U.K., while experiencing a lower number of reports overall, is seeing a similar pattern to the U.S. It went up, stayed pretty steady and is now on the decline, as you can see from the image above.

Reddit users still having problems

Trouble Logging In from r/fitbit

Fitbit says it's back to normal

According to the Fitbit status page, the outage is now listed as "Functionality back to normal."

That, plus the massive drop in Fitbit reports on Down Detector, leads us to believe that this outage is wrapping up, letting Fitbit users get back to using their favorite fitness trackers without issue.

Want the best Fitbit available today? Your choices come down to the Fitbit Charge 6 and Google Pixel Watch 3. Both devices are powered by Fitbit and produced by Google, but that's where the similarities end.

The Fitbit Charge 6 was announced in 2023 and remains the brand's flagship band-style fitness tracker. The Pixel Watch 3, meanwhile, launched in 2024 and is Google's one and only smartwatch offering, though it comes in two sizes.

For this test, I pitted the smaller 41mm Pixel Watch 3 ($349) against the Fitbit Charge 6 ($159). With Google winding down the Fitbit brand, there's a good chance that the Charge 6 is the end of the road for perhaps the brand's most beloved wearable line.

So, is the Pixel Watch 3 a good replacement for the Charge 6, at least from a fitness tracking standpoint? There's only one way to find out. Let the test begin!

Fitbit Charge 6 vs. Google Pixel Watch 3: Walk test

If you've read my previous walk test articles, you can probably go ahead and skip to the next section. For those new here, this is how these comparisons go down: With a smartwatch on either wrist, I begin tracking my walk. As a control, I manually count each step I take; my favorite Bose Quiet Comfort headphones help drown out the distraction.

To help me keep track of the total, I click an old-school manual tally counter every hundred steps before starting my tally over again at one. In this case, I repeated that process 65 times before finding a nice quiet park bench to settle down on and record the data.

Oh, and as an extra control, I recorded the walk using Strava on my trusty iPhone 12 Mini. Check out the results below:

Fitbit Charge 6 vs. Google Pixel Watch 3: Walk test results

Well, well, well — look at which device was closer to my actual step count total by a whole 17 steps; it's the Fitbit Charge 6. For what it's worth, both devices beat Strava's tally of 6,558 steps.

Unfortunately for the small but mighty Charge 6, things get a little funky when we move on to distance data. Despite nailing my step count total with impressive accuracy, the device appears to have severely undercounted my distance covered by a whopping 0.4 miles... that's not an insignificant difference.

The Fitbit Charge 6 frustratingly also does not report elevation gain data, even though it technically could using the onboard GPS. And while I didn't intend for this walk to be hilly, living in Seattle, Washington, a few hundred feet of elevation gain is par for the course when cruising around town on foot.

The Pixel Watch 3 does report climb data, which looks perhaps a tad inflated for this walk — I tend to trust Strava as the gold standard here — but still accurate enough for my needs.

Of course, had the Pixel Watch 3 undercounted my climb by 22 feet (compared to Strava), I might not be so forgiving.

Strava provides two pace metrics including an average moving pace — reported above — and an elapsed pace, which tends to be slower. In this case, my elapsed pace was 19 minutes and 15 seconds per mile, much closer to the Pixel Watch 3's metric.

Inflated pace data from the Fitbit Charge 6, meanwhile, makes sense given it measured a considerably shorter walk, distance-wise.

Nothing warms my heart more than two devices capturing similar heart rate data during these head-to-heads, and it doesn't get any more precise than this. The same goes for calories burned.

Finally, while the Pixel Watch 3 burned through 9% of its battery during my roughly one-hour-and-seven-minute walk, the Charge 6 somehow managed to gain 1% battery (from 98% when I left to 99% when I returned).

Fitbit Charge 6 vs. Google Pixel Watch 3: Winner

In today's battle of the Fitbit-powered Google wearables, the underdog Charge 6 comes out on top. However, even though the Fitbit Charge 6 managed a closer step count total to my manual count, the Pixel Watch 3 proved more accurate across the board.

Still, I'm impressed that the older, more affordable wearable was able to keep up with the newer and higher-end Pixel Watch 3. Ultimately, the Charge 6 remains one of the best fitness trackers for the money in 2025, especially if you like easy-wearing devices with great battery and onboard GPS so that you can leave your phone at home.

Which fitness trackers and/or smartwatches should I test head-to-head next? Let me know in the comments below.

More from Tom's Guide

• I walked 6,000 steps with the Apple Watch 10 vs Samsung Galaxy Watch 7 — this one was more accurate
• I biked 12 miles with the Apple Watch 10 vs Garmin Vivoactive 6 — here's the winner
• I test smartwatches for a living — and these are my 5 favorite models when I go hiking

Do you hear that? Those three repeating base notes? Yup, that’s Queen’s "Another One Bites the Dust" playing at Google HQ as the brand kills off yet another Fitbit feature.

For those needing a refresher, Google bought Fitbit in 2021 and ever since, has slowly chipped away at everything that makes Fitbit, well, Fitbit. While many of the best Fitbit features are now making their way into Google’s best smartwatch models such as. the Pixel Watch 3, the future of Fitbit has never been more in question.

First, in 2022, Google made all Fitbit users migrate to a Google account. Then, in 2023, the community challenges vanished. Next, in 2024, Google shuttered the popular Versa and Sense smartwatch lines. Now, in 2025, Google is killing off perfectly good features on existing devices —namely Google Assistant.

Let’s dive into what's happened.

Fitbit support for Google Assistant bites the dust

Google first announced intentions to shutter the Google Voice Assistant feature on the Fitbit Versa and Sense smartwatch lines over a year ago, and now appears to be making good on the promise.

While the 2024 announcement mentions the older Fitbit Sense and Versa 3 models, recent revelations make it clear that current-generation Fitbit Sense 2 and Versa 4 devices are also losing access.

A moderator post in the Fitbit Community forum published on March 21, 2025, confirms this.

“Over the next few weeks we will be progressively phasing out Google Assistant on your Fitbit device. This change means that Google Assistant voice control for activities will soon no longer be available on your Fitbit device,” the Fitbit forum post says.

The same post notes that Amazon’s Alexa voice assistant will remain available on the Versa 4 and Sense 2 in countries where it's supported (for now, at least).

My days of recommending Fitbit are probably over

This move by Google really grinds my gears, especially because both the Versa 4 and Sense 2 are actively being sold not just via Google directly, but also through major retailers like Amazon and Best Buy… for full price at that.

Stripping out features that someone already paid for is a major no-no in my mind, and I suspect Fitbit owners everywhere will be more than a little miffed by this development. Imagine buying a car only to have the dealer show up at your house a year later to turn off the backup camera because it’s "no longer supported."

Indeed, when I fired up my Fitbit Sense 2 and checked for the Google Assistant app, it was gone. However, if the feature still appears on your Fitbit, you’ll almost certainly be greeted with a pop-up when you try to open it saying something like, “Google Assistant on Fitbit watches is being turned down, this feature will stop working in the coming weeks.”

While this move by Google is disappointing, it’s also not terribly surprising. Unfortunately, the Fitbit Sense 2 used to be one of my favorite smartwatches thanks to its svelte design, bright screen, solid battery, simple interface and ample workout and wellness tools. But with one less smart feature on offer and the likelihood that more may be stripped away, it’s a device I’ll no longer be recommending.

So what should potential Fitbit Sense 2 or Versa 4 customers buy instead? The Garmin Vivoactive 6 is shaping up to be a great replacement for either. If having an onboard voice assistant is a must, the $100 Amazfit Active 2 is also worth a look.

Of course, you could go with the Pixel Watch 3, which has most of Fitbit’s best features. But then again, settling for a Pixel Watch is exactly what Google wants you to do. So, rather than playing into the brand's ultimate sacrifice-Fitbit-for-Pixel scheme, maybe just get that Garmin.

More from Tom's Guide

• You can now use Google's AI to make videos from text — and I'm already obsessed
• Bring back Google’s old-school search results with this one simple hack
• Google Maps just got a huge trip-planning upgrade — and it involves your screenshots

Fitbit’s experimental Personalized Sleep Schedule feature is now available to try through Fitbit Labs, and it’s designed to improve your sleep by tracking your energy levels throughout the day and suggesting bedtimes and wake times.

This is done by taking surveys throughout the day that gauge your energy levels and provide advice on how much sleep you need that night.

The launch of the new feature was spotted by 9to5Google and if you have one of the best fitness trackers made by Fitbit or Google, it’s well worth giving a try if you are eligible.

How to try Personalized Sleep Schedule

To be eligible to try the Personalized Sleep Schedule through Fitbit Labs you need to be using the Android version of the Fitbit app and based in the U.S. Here’s the full list of criteria you need to hit from the Fitbit Help Center.

• Use the Fitbit app on an Android phone.
• Be located in the US and use the Fitbit app in English.
• Be at least 18 years old.
• Sign in to the Fitbit app using a Google Account.
• Review and accept the lab-specific consent.
• Make sure you have a sleep log for the day. If you didn’t sleep with one of the devices listed above, you can manually log your sleep in the Fitbit app.
• Have an offer to join the Personalized Sleep Schedule lab on the You tab in the Fitbit App.

If you hit all the requirements listed then hit the You tab in the Fitbit app, go to the Fitbit Labs section, click See All and then you should see and offer to Get a Personalized Sleep Schedule. If it’s not there then try checking again later in the day after shutting and reopening the app.

How does Personalized Sleep Schedule work?

Once you’ve signed up you’ll be reminded to take surveys throughout the day. The first of these is the morning check-in, which is available up until 10 am. This is a two-minute survey that covers any factors that could impact the upcoming night’s sleep.

There are then three daytime surveys that are spread throughout the day that just have one question to rate your energy levels, which will feed into your sleep suggestions for that night.

The last survey is the evening bedtime check-in which has to be done before 11 pm. This is another two-minute survey about factors that could influence your sleep, and once you’ve taken it you’ll be given your Personalized Sleep Schedule for that night.

This is a suggested bedtime and wake time based on your sleep needs and sleep debt, which are calculated through the sleep you’ve logged through your tracker or in the app, and your responses to the surveys.

How could Personalized Sleep Schedule improve sleep?

Having a consistent sleep schedule is generally advised as one of the best ways to improve your sleep in general, as it can help keep your body in a natural sleep-wake cycle.

There are lots of other factors that go into good sleep though, and some might find it hard to actually stick to the recommendations from Fitbit.

My Garmin Fenix 8 recommends a suggested sleep time to me each day through Garmin's Sleep Coach feature, and I found it more of an annoyance than a help when my child was six months old and waking a lot, for example.

However, checking in on your energy levels throughout the day and thinking about factors that might influence your sleep are both habits that can prove helpful in tracking things that do affect your sleep so you can adjust them in the future.

A suggested bedtime can also be useful in providing an extra nudge to get to bed in the evening when it’s all too tempting to watch one more episode of something or scroll social media instead of hitting the hay.

More from Tom's Guide:

• RIP Fitbit? 5 alternatives to Fitbit’s best trackers and smartwatches
• Fitbit is exiting the cheap smartwatch race — and this brand could replace it
• Garmin Instinct 3 vs. Apple Watch Ultra 2: Biggest differences to consider before you buy

At $249, the Fitbit Sense 2 is admittedly more than twice the cost of the $99 Amazfit Active 2. But the former is getting up there in age, which means, you can easily find it on sale.

Price and case shape aside, the two devices share a lot of traits and features. Both the Fitbit Sense 2 and Amazfit Active 2 are sleek, reasonably lightweight wearables with bright and responsive touchscreens, onboard GPS, physical buttons and loads of wellness and fitness tracking tech. You also get a small smattering of smart features on either, along with support for both iPhones and Android handsets.

But which one is the more reliable fitness tracker? To find out, I tossed one on either wrist and set out for a walk around Seattle's Lake Washington, manually counting all my steps. Read on to find out the wearable that came closest to matching my actual step count total, along with analysis of other metrics like distance, elevation gain, heart rate, calories burned and battery used.

Fitbit Sense 2 vs. Amazfit Active 2: Walk test

For this walk test, I had the Amazfit Active 2 on my left wrist and the Fitbit Sense 2 on the right. For what it's worth, only the Fitbit app lets you specify whether you're wearing the watch on your dominant or non-dominant wrist.

As always, to keep track of steps, I counted each pace until I hit 100 before clicking my manual tally counter and starting over again at one. Another useful trick I use to stay on count: my left foot is always the odd count and my right the even. A pair of the best noise-canceling headphones also help me to concentrate.

As a control for distance, elevation gain and pace, I additionally logged my walk using Strava on my trusty iPhone 12 mini (as I always do for these comparisons).

With a little more than 3 miles and (apparently) the equivalent of 28 floors climbed, here's how the data from the Fitbit Sense 2 vs. Amazfit Active 2 compares.

Fitbit Sense 2 vs. Amazfit Active 2: Walk test results

I finished my walk with the sun shining brightly and scant a cloud in the sapphire blue sky. Both devices were within 200 paces of my actual step count, which is pretty good, but the Active 2 only overcounted by 117 while the Sense 2 added 187 steps to my count. Strava, meanwhile, beat both devices with a total step count of 6,046

The Amazfit's distance data matches Strava nicely while the Fitbit appears to have undercalculated my total distance by roughly 0.43 miles, which is not insignificant. This result is also a bit strange given that the Fitbit also logged a higher step count.

The Fitbit Sense 2 doesn't provide an elevation gain metric for your workouts, but it will tell you how many "floors" you climbed for the day. I only wore the Sense 2 for this walk test, which, according to Google, was the equivalent of 28 climbed floors. Google calculates one floor as ten feet, by the way.

While the Sense 2's elevation gain lines up nicely with Strava's, the Amazfit Active 2 once again seemingly overcalculated my total elevation by a noticeable margin. I say "once again" because, versus the Samsung Galaxy Fit3, the Active 2 logged 58 feet more than the control. And against the Apple Watch SE (2022), the Active 2 overcounted by 165 feet compared to the control.

Pace data is all over the place. Strava tends to have a faster pace than most wearables because the app aggressively pauses tracking anytime you stop moving. However, these results are about as wide-ranging as I've encountered. I notably stopped twice during this walk test, each for roughly 90 seconds to snap photos of the scenic views.

Heart rate data between the Sense 2 and Active 2 also looks funky. However, I'm inclined to trust Google's measurements more than Amazfit's on this one. First, 116 bpm is much closer to my average heart rate from prior walk tests of similar distance and elevation gain; the same goes for 165 bpm as my maximum.

Finally, the Active 2 depleted a little less battery than the Sense 2 over my hour (and change) walk but both wearables left me impressed given onboard GPS tends to be a major power-suck for any device.

Fitbit Sense 2 vs. Amazfit Active 2: And the winner is...

When comparing step count tracking accuracy between the Fitbit Sense 2 versus Amazfit Active 2, Amazfit beats Google, for this test at least. However, there are caveats. The Active 2's elevation data is way off from our control for the third test in a row, while the heart rate data is oddly low, something I also noted in the device's face-off with the Galaxy Fit3.

Both devices logged step counts higher than my actual total but still within a reasonable margin of error. However, the Sense 2 churned out strangely low distance and weirdly slow pace metrics, even if its elevation gain and heart rate data appear to be right on the money.

More from Tom's Guide

• Samsung Galaxy Fit3 vs Fitbit Inspire 3: Which budget fitness tracker should you buy?
• I tracked skiing with a $99 smartwatch — here’s how it compares to my $450 Garmin
• Under $100 smartwatch test: I walked 5,000 steps with the Amazfit Bip 5 vs Armitron Matrix — here’s the winner

Exactly a month ago, Google pushed out a mandatory update to certain Fitbit Sense and Fitbit Versa 3 smartwatches it had detected were at risk of overheating. Owners of devices that received the update were eligible to receive $50 from Google as compensation, which sounded like a good resolution to impacted Fitbit fans.

But it turns out it may not have been such a great deal after all. The Fitbit forum and subreddit have been peppered with posts from owners of the smartwatches who have seen the update decimate their battery life, in some cases making the wearables all but useless.

“Before doing the update my battery would last about 5 -6 days,” wrote one user on the official forums. “Now since doing the update it lasts less than a day. That's with everything turned off too (eg. Notifications, snore detection, vibrations etc).”

This triggered a host of similar horror stories in the replies. One reported receiving a low battery warning just hours after charging to 100%, while another stated their device’s run time had dropped to 17% in less than 24 hours.

“I can't be charging it every day, and it's unacceptable to say a forced firmware update, due to a battery defect with their product, should be able to have this affect [sic.],” the user added

“I had to charge mine twice in one day and it cannot even make it through the night now. It is unusable,” responded another.

It’s a similar story on Reddit with less than 24 hours being the norm. “Drains from 85% to 35% in 3hres”, wrote one owner.

“I went from getting 3 days to barely 24 hours after the update,” writes another. “It's insane to me that a company's response to a battery recall can be to make the product basically unusable.

“Imagine if a car company could make a car's max speed 15mph in response to an airbag recall.”

An extreme drop

To be clear, the support page for the firmware update does mention that battery life will be impacted.

“The update will improve the stability of the device's battery performance and reduce the risk of the battery overheating,” the text reads. “As a result, the battery will last for shorter periods between charges and you may need to charge your device more frequently.”

But given the extreme drops in battery life that impacted users are experiencing, it feels safe to assume that Google wasn’t expecting this big a drop when the update rolled out. A change from five to six days to one is a drop of over 80%, and the tone of the above text doesn’t indicate anything near that drastic.

We have reached out to Google to ask about the widely reported battery issues, and will update the piece if and when we hear back.

In the meantime, however, there is an early sign that the company is beginning to take the problem seriously. While the first moderator reply on the community thread at the start of the month just reiterates the official line that the firmware update could affect battery life, a second post yesterday from the same account encourages users to contact customer support.

There's no need to take a hammer to your piggy bank. The Samsung Galaxy Fit3 costs just $59 and the Amazfit Active 2 starts at $99. The former launched in 2024 but recently became available in the U.S. while the latter was announced this January at CES.

We're still in the process of testing each model, so neither has quite made it into our best cheap smartwatch or best fitness tracker buying guides yet, but both make a strong case for inclusion. Why? They each boast a metal case, AMOLED touchscreen, a week-plus of battery life, detailed sleep insights, training and recovery tips and the ability to keep tabs on more than 100-plus sports and physical activities. All that for less than a Benjamin.

There are some notable differences between the two, though, outside of the obvious... one is a circle and the other is a rectangle. Beyond that, the Samsung Galaxy Fit3 is compatible with Android smartphones only. The Amazfit Active 2 plays nicely with iPhone and Android devices.

Only the Amazfit has an onboard GPS, while Galaxy Fit3 owners will need to bring their smartphone along for location tracking data. While both are reasonably lightweight and easy-wearing, the Fit3 has a noticeably brighter screen, making it easier to use on sunny days. However, the Active 2 has two physical buttons on the side of the case, which I prefer to the Samsung's one.

Finally, the Amazfit Active 2 comes in two versions. The tech is a match between them, but the standard $99 edition has a glass screen and aluminum case while the premium $129 edition boasts a tougher sapphire screen and titanium case. The latter edition also comes with both a leather and a silicone strap while the standard Amazfit only comes with the silicone.

With those key similarities and differences out of the way, you might be asking yourself, 'Which budget-friendly fitness tracker is more accurate, the Samsung Galaxy Fit3 or Amazfit Active 2?' Well, I've got answers for you, dear reader. Read on.

Samsung Galaxy Fit3 vs. Amazfit Active 2: Walk test

Taking advantage of another rare sunny day in Seattle, Washington, I tossed on my chunkiest New Balance walking shoes and more Patagonia/Arc'teryx outerwear than I care to admit (it was dang cold out), and split for the mean streets of the Emerald City, which were mostly empty save for some bundled up dog walkers and intrepid school-aged children whizzing around on scooters; I can only assume they were playing hooky. But I digress.

As always, I manually counted each step during the walk with some help from my old-school mechanical tally counter which I use to note every 100 steps taken. This makes the overall task of keeping track of my steps a whole lot easier.

I also tracked my walk using Strava on my iPhone. For reference, the Amazfit was worn on my left wrist and the Samsung on my right. Read on to see how the results from these two trackers did after 5,500 steps.

Samsung Galaxy Fit3 vs. Amazfit Active 2: Walk test results

Samsung undercounted my walk by 52 steps while Amazfit overcounted by 71 steps (Strava overcounted by 66). These are seriously impressive results well within a reasonable margin of error. Total distance data is similarly consistent across the board.

Things get a little shaky when it comes to elevation data, though. The Galaxy Fit3 has an onboard barometer so it should provide a total climb/elevation gain figure. It just doesn't. For some reason, Samsung has the device programmed to only report your minimum and maximum elevation for the workout, which isn't all that useful.

On the flip side, the Active 2 offers elevation gain data, it's just noticeably higher than what Strava recorded. From my experience, Strava's elevation data tends to be pretty darn accurate (and I didn't do that much hill climbing on this walk). So, I'm inclined (pun intended) to suspect that Amazfit exaggerated my efforts in this regard.

Moving on to pace, both the Galaxy Fit3 and Strava are programmed to pause workout tracking for momentary breaks in movement, while the Active 2 seems less inclined to do so, leading to a slower overall pace.

Heart rate data is considerably different between Samsung and Amazfit, too. However, judging from previous walk tests of similar effort, the Galaxy Fit3's tally seems likely more accurate than the Active 2's. For example, when I walked 5,500 steps with the Apple Watch 10 vs. Google Pixel Watch 3 (note: not the exact same route) the max heart rates were 160 bpm and 134 bpm, respectively, and the average heart rates were 115 bpm and 110 bpm.

Finally, the Active 2 calculated more calories burned, which is a bit odd, given the device found my overall workout less strenuous than the Galaxy Fit3.

Samsung Galaxy Fit3 vs. Amazfit Active 2: and the winner is...

Ultimately, with a total step count that's 19 steps closer to my actual count, of 5,500 steps, the Samsung Galaxy Fit3 comes out victorious against the Amazfit Active 2 in this fitness-tacking accuracy showdown. This is Samsung's second walk-test victory in less than a week; the Galaxy Fit3 defeated the Fitbit Inspire 3 during a recent 6,500-step showdown.

But, back to this battle, as there are caveats. Both of these devices logged remarkably accurate step count and distance data. But, neither provided particularly useful (Samsung) or seemingly accurate (Amazfit) elevation data.

The Amazfit Active 2's heart rate data also seems off, but more testing is needed to confirm whether or not it was a fluke this time around. On that subject: I'm in the process of reviewing both of these devices as we speak, so stay tuned, for further analysis soon.

More from Tom's Guide:

• Under $100 smartwatch test: I walked 5,000 steps with the Amazfit Bip 5 vs Armitron Matrix — here’s the winner
• Samsung Galaxy Fit3 vs Fitbit Inspire 3: Which budget fitness tracker should you buy?
• I tracked skiing with a $99 smartwatch — here’s how it compares to my $450 Garmin

The Fitbit Inspire 3 is the best budget fitness tracker we've tested. However, at just over two years old, it's not the spryest horse in the stable these days. Also, with Google winding down various Fitbit product lines, we have no clue whether or not will see a Fitbit Inspire 4.

Meanwhile, the Samsung Galaxy Fit3 just launched in the U.S. this winter (though it was first announced in February 2024). A paired-down version of the Samsung Galaxy Watch 7 with most of the same fitness and holistic features (but none of the smarts or apps support), it has the makings of a top-tier competitor, and a super-tempting launch price to boot ($59).

We're still testing Samsung's latest tracker, but based on my first impressions, here's how the Fitbit Inspire 3 vs Samsung Galaxy Fit3 stack up across five crucial categories including price, compatibility, design, health/fitness tech and battery life.

Galaxy Fit3 vs Fitbit Inspire 3: Specs compared

Galaxy Fit3 vs Fitbit Inspire 3: Price and launch date

The Fitbit Inspire 3 made its debut in fall 2022 with a launch price of $99. Though it still retails for that same price nearly 2.5 years later, it also goes on sale fairly frequently for between $10 and $20 off. For instance, Amazon has it for $89 as of writing.

The Samsung Galaxy Fit3 was announced in Winter 2024 but didn't become available in the U.S. until January 2025. The launch price is $59, though I've already seen it listed for less on Amazon, similar to the Fitbit.

Winner: Samsung Galaxy Fit3

Galaxy Fit3 vs Fitbit Inspire 3: Phone compatibility

This one is pretty cut and dry. The Fitbit app plays nicely on both iPhone and Android smartphones while the Samsung Health app is Android only. You'll also need to be running Android 10 or higher to sync the Samsung Galaxy Fit3.

It's also not crystal clear whether one of the latest Samsung Galaxy phones is required to fully unlock all of the Fit3's health features, namely, the advanced sleep-tracking insights. I've reached out to Samsung for clarification on the matter and will update this section when I know more.

Winner: Fitbit Inspire 3

Galaxy Fit3 vs Fitbit Inspire 3: Design and usability

The Samsung Galaxy Fit3 has more than than twice the screen real estate of the Fitbit Inspire 3 along with a brighter maximum output that makes it much easier to view in direct daylight.

While the Fitbit is thicker than the Samsung, the device's overall footprint is considerably smaller. The Inspire 3 is also roughly half the weight of the Fit3, making it a comfier and stealthier option for fitness tracking.

Both fitness trackers offer 50 meters of water resistance but the Galaxy Fit3 has a slightly more impressive build thanks to its metal bezel (the Inspire 3 case is all plastic).

While the Fitbit has two haptic buttons on either side of the case, the Samsung has a single physical button. Both screens are touch-sensitive but I find the Galaxy Fit3's display easier to navigate thanks to its size; it also seems more responsive to nuanced touch. Overall, this gives the Samsung tracker better usability than the Fitbit.

Winner: Samsung Galaxy Fit3

Galaxy Fit3 vs Fitbit Inspire 3: Fitness and health tracking

You get similar sets of holistic sensors on both the Inspire 3 and Fit3, including the ability to monitor heart rate, blood oxygen saturation, body temperature, physical movement and respiratory rate.

Neither device has an onboard GPS for location tracking, so, if you're going for a run, walk or bike ride while wearing either, you'll need to bring your phone along. For hikers and anyone who loves mountain recreation, only the Fit3 has an onboard barometer to report elevation data.

Google recently expanded the number of activities that can be tracked with the Inspire 3 to 40+ but it still doesn't come close to matching Samsung's list of 100-plus compatible workout types. For example, I can track snowboarding with the Samsung but not the Fitbit.

But when it comes to basic workout tracking, like keeping tabs on walks and jogs, which device is more reliable? Earlier this week, I tracked a walk with the Fitbit Inspire 3 vs. Galaxy Fit3 and the Samsung wearable proved superior, at least, in accurately measuring steps and distance.

In addition to fitness tracking, both of these devices offer lots of tools to help you improve your sleep quality, maximize workout recovery and even train for a goal. The difference is that Fitbit places some of its best insights behind its Fitbit Premium paywall ($9.99 a month or $79.99 for the year) and Samsung doesn't.

Winner: Samsung Galaxy Fit3

Galaxy Fit3 vs Fitbit Inspire 3: Battery life

The Fitbit Inspire 3 lasts roughly 10 days between charges, which is very good given its diminutive size, while Samsung says that the Galaxy Fit3 can last just shy of two weeks per charge. I'm still testing those claims, but thus far, they seem to check out.

Winner: Samsung Galaxy Fit3

Which fitness tracker wins?

For Android smartphone users, the Samsung Galaxy Fit3 is the clear choice over the Fitbit Inspire 3 with better battery life, similar health features without a paywall, a greater range of trackable workout types and a larger display that's easier to use.

However, the Fitbit Inspire 3 remains the better option for iPhone users simply because the Galaxy Fit3 is incompatible with iOS. However, those craving Samsung's larger display and cheaper price tag may want to check out the Amazfit Band7, instead.

Overall winner: Samsung Galaxy Fit3

More from Tom's Guide:

• These Fitbit models are overheating — see if yours is on the list to get $50 from Google
• Garmin Instinct 3 vs. Apple Watch Ultra 2: Biggest differences to consider before you buy
• Samsung just launched a kid-friendly smartwatch mode for the Galaxy Watch 7 — and parents can try it now

The Samsung Galaxy Fit3 is the new kid on the entry-level fitness tracker block, boasting a bright, responsive AMOLED screen, support for tracking more than 100 workout types, an onboard Sp02 sensor, nearly two weeks of battery, and comprehensive sleep data for under $60.

I'm in the process of testing the Samsung Galaxy Fit3 now, and it's already making a strong case for inclusion in our best fitness tracker buying guide. But, which fitness tracker is it most likely to knock out? One possibility is the Amazfit Band 7, our favorite tracker under $50. Another is the popular Fitbit Inspire 3, our top wallet-friendly pick.

For this article, I tested the Inspire 3 against the new Galaxy Fit3 in a head-to-head showdown of fitness-tracking supremacy. Which entry-level wearable came out on top? Read on.

Fitbit Inspire 3 vs. Samsung Galaxy Fit3: Features compared

Here's an in-depth comparison of how the Galaxy Fit3 vs Fitbit Inspire 3 compare across key categories like price, battery, compatibility and usability. However, for the TLDR crowd, I've condensed the major themes of the piece below:

The Galaxy Fit3 is a new fitness tracker for 2025 with a launch price of $59. The Fitbit Inspire 3 launched in late 2022 for $99. Neither device has an onboard GPS, so you'll need to bring your phone with you during outdoor workouts for location details.

The Fit3 does have an onboard barometer for elevation tracking; the Inspire 3 does not. Both devices boast batteries that will last greater than a week. Samsung says the Fit3 gets up to 13 days of battery per charge, while the Inspire 3 gets around 10 days.

You get a touch-sensitive AMOLED screen on either tracker but the Samsung has significantly more screen real estate and a brighter maximum output, making it easier to see in direct sunlight. On the flip side, the Inspire 3 is smaller and stealthier than the Fit3.

The Galaxy tracker also supports a wider range of workout types compared to the entry-level Fitbit, but both do the basics like tracking runs, walks, hikes, bike rides and gym-based workouts. You can also keep tabs on daily movement and heart rate with either.

Sleep tracking is offered on both the Fit3 and Inspire 3, as are insights into workout recovery. However, only the Galaxy device has fall detection.

One major drawback to the Galaxy Fit3 is compatibility with Android smartphones only. The Fitbit Inspire 3, on the other hand, plays nicely with both Apple and Android.

Fitbit Inspire 3 vs. Samsung Galaxy Fit3: Walk test

If you're new here, this is a quick rundown of how our walk test is performed: With a device on either wrist, I switch on tracking and set out on a walk around Seattle, Washington. In addition to the trackers, I also log the walk using Strava on my phone for an additional set of data to compare my results to.

While I look across metrics like distance, heart rate and calories burned, the winner of the walk test is the device that has the most accurate total step count when my walk is complete.

As a control, I manually count each step. Once I hit 100, I click a mechanical tally counter and start over again at one. With 65 clicks and 6,500 steps logged on a gorgeous January day, here's how the logged data from the Fitbit Inspire 3 vs. Samsung Galaxy Fit3 compares.

Fitbit Inspire 3 vs. Samsung Galaxy Fit3: Walk test results

The Samsung Galaxy Fit3 undercounted my step count total by 76 steps and the Fitbit Inspire 3 overcounted by 123. Both are impressive results that fall well within a reasonable margin of error (off by less than 3%) but Samsung's total is closer to my actual count. For what it's worth, Strava was even closer at 6,518 steps.

Despite overcounting my steps by a little, the Fitbit seemingly undercounted my distance by roughly half of a mile. Frustratingly, despite having access to elevation data via my paired iPhone, the Inspire 3 doesn't generate a value for elevation gain.

Seattle is a darn hilly city, and whether I'm walking, running, or biking, I want to know just how much I've climbed when all is said and done. Fortunately, the Galaxy Fit3 does offer elevation data courtesy of its onboard barometer. Unfortunately, it only records your minimum and maximum elevation for the workout, not your actual climb.

While Strava and the Galaxy Fit3 noted fairly similar average paces, the Inspire 3's pace is notably slower. My hunch here is that Strava and the Samsung are auto-pausing whenever I stop moving if only for a few moments, say, to tie my shoe. Meanwhile, the Fitbit seems to be counting any and all pauses against me.

With the Samsung on my left wrist and the Fitbit on my right, I expected some variances in heart rate data and indeed, there were. The Galaxy Fit3 recorded a slightly higher average and max heart rate than the Inspire 3. However, the difference of 6-12 bpm isn't cause for concern, as my actual average and max heart rates likely fall somewhere between the two results.

Fitbit Inspire 3 vs. Samsung Galaxy Fit3: and the winner is...

The Samsung Galaxy Fit3 comfortably wins this showdown versus the Fitbit Inspire 3 thanks to its more accurate step count and total distance data. However, this doesn't mean that the Fitbit Inspire 3 is a bad tracker. Despite lower-than-expected distance and slower-than-expected pace data, the rest of the Inspire 3's results are more than accurate enough.

But the Galaxy Fit3 is today's champion which means that Samsung is free to bask in its much-earned victory over Fitbit/Google, at least, until the next walk test between these two titans.

More from Tom's Guide:

• Under $100 smartwatch test: I walked 5,000 steps with the Amazfit Bip 5 vs Armitron Matrix — here’s the winner
• Samsung just launched a kid-friendly smartwatch mode for the Galaxy Watch 7 — and parents can try it now
• I hiked 9 miles with the Apple Watch SE vs. Pixel Watch 3 vs. Garmin Forerunner 165 — 5 things I learned

I just got my hands on the new Samsung Galaxy Fit3, a sleek and diminutive fitness tracker loaded with high-end features and specs for less than $60. This includes a lovely 1.6-inch AMOLED touchscreen, nearly two weeks of battery, sleep coaching with snore detection, a blood oxygen saturation sensor (sorry, Apple Watch folks), fall detection, and of course, lots of fitness tracking features.

An update to 2020's Galaxy Fit2, the Samsung Galaxy Fit3 is a massive improvement over its predecessor in every regard, and also potentially my new favorite cheap fitness tracker available.

Samsung Galaxy Fit3: Price and availability

The Samsung Galaxy Fit3 was first announced in February 2024 with availability confirmed for select markets only. Now, nearly a year later, the Samsung Galaxy Fit3 is officially available in the U.S. for a reasonable $59. Choose from Dark Grey, Silver, or Pink Gold.

By comparison, Fitbit's cheapest tracker is the Inspire 3, which launched in 2022 and costs $99 (though you can often find it for $10 to $20 less than that depending on sales).

Samsung Galaxy Fit3: Design and build quality

The Galaxy Fit3 is built around a rectangular 1.6-inch AMOLED touchscreen. The side of the case is constructed of aluminum while the back panel appears to be polycarbonate. A single button adorns the side; by default, it wakes the watch up. Users can choose when setting up the Fit3 whether they want the button oriented on the left or right side.

The device ships on a soft, silicone strap that attaches with a pin and buckle system. With a weight of 0.65 ounces, a height of 42mm and a thickness of a little less than 10mm, the Fit3 wears comfortably on my 6.5-inch wrist.

Water resistance of 50 meters should be enough for short surface-level swims or showers. The Fit3 is also IP68-rated against dust, dirt and moisture.

Samsung Galaxy Fit3: Key features

In addition to monitoring your daily step count and heart rate, you can track more than 100 workout types with the Fit3, with lots of post-exercise insights into your performance and recovery.

I'm a huge fan of Samsung's holistic features, especially the sleep-tracking tools you'll find in the latest Galaxy Watch models and Galaxy Ring. In addition to daily sleep reports, I find the daily sleep quality score particularly useful. This is why I'm thrilled to see features offered in the brand's most basic wearable. Plus, you also get access to Samsung's nifty snore detection feature.

Users can also monitor their blood oxygen saturation levels in a matter of seconds, something U.S.-based Apple Watch owners can't do. The Fit3 additionally supports high/low heart rate warnings, along with tools to monitor stress, nutrition and water intake. Rare for a wearable at this price point is the inclusion of fall detection, which can share your location info with an emergency contact if an incident is registered.

There's no GPS, so you'll need your phone for location tracking, but an onboard barometer should lead to precise elevation data, something I appreciate as an avid hiker.

The Fit3 does not support NFC payments or third-party apps. It does support mirrored phone notifications and can even be used to respond to texts (though not calls, as there is no mic or speaker). You can also control media from a connected device, but there's no onboard storage for downloading music.

Samsung Galaxy Fit3: Battery life

Samsung says the Galaxy Fit3 can last up to 13 days per charge, which is pretty solid. By comparison, the Fitbit Inspire 3 lasts 10 days per charge, while the Amazfit Band 7 goes for a whopping 28 days in battery saver mode or 12 days with heavy use.

Samsung's tracker charges using a proprietary cable that magnetically attaches to the bottom of the device. The other end is USB-C.

Samsung Galaxy Fit3: Outlook

With Google winding down the Fitbit brand, we don't know whether or not a replacement for the popular Fitbit Charge 6 or Fitbit Inspire 3 — two of the best fitness trackers we've ever tested — will ever see the light of day. However, as these models age, the demand for wallet-friendly, easy-wearing fitness trackers remains.

Already, brands like Amazfit have moved into Fitbit's territory, with devices like the Amazfit Band 7 offering a similar form factor and set of tracking tools to the Inspire 3, but at a more affordable price. The $99 Active 2 is another seriously impressive new model from Amazfit.

U.S. mechanical watch brand, Armitron similarly jumped into the fitness tracker market last fall with a series of budget-friendly options, like the $75 Armitron Matrix.

However, Samsung has a clear advantage over these much smaller brands as one of the largest and most established players in the wearables tech space.

The Samsung Galaxy Watch 7 and Galaxy Watch Ultra are two of the best smartwatches money can buy, while the Samsung Galaxy Ring is the best smart ring not named Oura. And I'd argue that Samsung's reputation for wellness and fitness monitoring is matched by only Apple and Google.

Moreover, if I were shopping for a new fitness tracker and came across three similarly-priced and designed devices boasting comparable specs: the Amazfit Band7, Armitron Matrix, and Samsung Galaxy Fit3, I'd almost certainly spring for the Fit3 based on Samsung's legacy in wearables.

Of course, Armitron and Amazfit have one major advantage over Samsung: their devices work with Apple and Android handsets. At the same time, the Galaxy Fit3 is Android only, a factor that seriously limits its appeal. Dangit, Samsung!

(The fine print says that the Fit3 'must be paired with a Samsung Galaxy smartphone with Android 10.0,' but it appears that most current Android phones will play nicely with the new tracker.)

That point aside, if the Samsung Galaxy Fit3 proves to be a reliable tracker in our testing and features like fall detection and sleep coaching work as intended, then it's almost guaranteed to show up in our best fitness tracker buying guide.

Ultimately, I'm a big fan of the Samsung Galaxy Watch 7 — which I reviewed — particularly, its holistic features and insights. But with a starting price of $299, it's not exactly affordable. Could the Galaxy Fit3 serve as a Galaxy Watch 7 'Lite' with comparable health tech for a fifth of the price? I've got it on my wrist right now and plan to find out. Stay tuned.

More from Tom's Guide:

• Samsung just launched a kid-friendly smartwatch mode for the Galaxy Watch 7 — and parents can try it now
• I wore the Garmin Instinct 3 for over a week — here's 5 things I like and 2 I hate
• Samsung Galaxy Ring 2 — all the rumors so far

Owners of the Fitbit Sense and Fitbit Versa 3 take note: Your wearable could be at risk of overheating and Google wants you to be aware of the danger. While your smartwatch is unlikely to burst into flames on your wrist, faulty lithium-ion batteries could lead to a nasty burn.

To be clear, not all Fitbit Sense or Versa 3 models are impacted, and users with at-risk devices will receive both a notification within the Fitbit app and an email from Google. You can also fill out this Google support form to find out if your smartwatch is one of the faulty models.

Fitbit battery issue: firmware fix

The good news is that Google already has a firmware update ready for the issue, and it’s actively rolling out to users. While the software fix should mostly mitigate battery overheating dangers, the bad news is that it will also limit the overall battery life of the impacted device, though we don’t know by how much.

Those who receive a notification that their device is impacted will be prompted to update their firmware ASAP. Google warns that failing to do so could result in your smartwatch automatically performing a factory reset, which would erase any personal information you have stored.

Fitbit battery issue: $50 compensation

For your troubles, the tech giant is compensating affected users with $50. Originally launched in 2020, the Fitbit Versa 3 was priced at $229 when it debuted while the original Fitbit Sense arrived with a $329 price tag.

Again, this issue plagues only a ‘limited number of Fitbit Sense and Fitbit Versa 3 devices,’ and those who own a Versa 3 or Sense that isn’t impacted don’t need to do anything. Google also notes that your battery will continue to perform ‘the same as before.’

It’s also worth mentioning that neither the Fitbit Sense 2 nor the Fitbit Versa 4 have the battery overheating issue, which is good because they’re two of the best Fitbit models you can buy right now. Too bad Google decided to pull the plug on both smartwatch lines...

More from Tom's Guide:

• RIP Fitbit? 5 alternatives to Fitbit’s best trackers and smartwatches
• Fitbit is exiting the cheap smartwatch race — and this brand could replace it
• Garmin Instinct 3 vs. Apple Watch Ultra 2: Biggest differences to consider before you buy

The new Pinwheel smartwatch is one of the coolest wearables I came across at CES 2025. And though it looks like a proper smartwatch — at a glance, one could easily mistake it for an Apple Watch Ultra — the Pinwheel watch is actually built with kids in mind.

Pinwheel has been making kid-centric smartphones since its launch in 2020 but this is the brand's first wearable device. Equipped with GPS and 4G LTE, the concept behind the watch is to provide youngsters with "training wheels for connected devices."

Packed with safety tools so parents can keep tabs on their child's location, contacts and messages, it also boasts a huge library of kid-friendly apps and games. There's even an AI chatbot tailored to youngsters (parents can disable this feature, of course).

Set to ship by the end of March, I got my hands on the forthcoming Pinwheel smartwatch on the CES show floor this month and chatted with the team behind it to learn more. Here's everything you need to know about this promising new kid-centric smartwatch.

Pinwheel smartwatch: Price and availability

Announced at CES 2025, the Pinwheel smartwatch is anticipated to start shipping in February. It will cost $159 for the device, plus an additional $15 a month for 4G LTE (provided by AT&T).

Preorders aren't open yet, but you can hop on the waitlist for the Pinwheel smartwatch at the bottom of the page on Pinwheel.com.

Pinwheel smartwatch: Design and build quality

Unlike other smartwatches designed for kids, this one actually looks like a real smartwatch thanks to an all-metal case and a large touchscreen display. The case design looks remarkably Apple Watch Ultra-like. There are two physical controls along the right side of the case, including a button and a digital crown. The other side contains a built-in speaker and a SIM card slot.

When you hold it, the Pinwheel watch feels well-constructed and built to last. It boasts an IP67 environmental sealing rating against dust and water. This should translate to solid protection against dirt, grime and accidental liquid spills. The watch is technically submersible for short periods but I'd avoid swimming with it on.

Battery life should be good for roughly one day per charge. Like the Apple Watch, the charger for the Pinwheel connects to the bottom of the case magnetically.

However, unlike most modern adult smartwatches, the new Pinwheel watch sports not one but two onboard cameras. The primary camera faces the user and is intended for video calls, a feature that won't be available right at launch, though it's slated for sometime later in 2025. That primary camera can also be used for selfies.

The second camera is located at the top of the watch and is designed for kids to use creatively. Both cameras support photo and video capture. More importantly, parents can disable the cameras if they feel uncomfortable with the feature.

For launch, a selection of colorful rubber straps will be on offer, allowing kids some level of personalization.

Pinwheel smartwatch: Connectivity and parental controls

What kid is a smartwatch for children without strong parental controls? Fortunately, the brand's experience building kid-centric smartphones informed their development of the Pinwheel watch.

Parents can check in on their child's location via GPS and even set up a geofenced area that triggers alerts if their kid goes beyond the designated zone. Similarly, you can set up the watch to generate notifications when your child arrives at or departs a specific location, like, school.

Only approved phone numbers can contact the Pinwheel smartwatch and parents can view their kid's message remotely through the Pinwheel app. Texts are sent via SMS, not through some special messaging app, and the Pinwheel watch also supports voice-to-text.

Finally, as your kid gets older, Pinwheels offers a ton of customization over the watch's restrictions so that parents can loosen them as they see fit.

Pinwheel smartwatch: Kid-friendly features

One of the things that most sold me on Pinwheel is the brand's enormous library of kid-friendly apps and games, of which there are more than 1,200 to choose from including Spotify for kids. Currently, these apps are available on Pinwheel's kid-friendly smartphone only. However, they should hopefully make their way to the watch, too. Pinwheels reps assure me that each and every one of these apps has been manually approved by an actual human at the company. They all boast ratings, too.

You'll find no social networking or adult apps on the device, and Pinwheel makes it easy for parents to limit access to any number of apps.

Unique to the new Pinwheel smartwatch is its PinwheelGPT AI chat app. This child-oriented chatbot uses ChatGPT to answer questions like, 'Why is the sky blue?' Answers are programmed to be short and digestible. The app is also designed to avoid controversial topics. If one is brought up, the AI bot will refrain from answering and instead recommend the user talk to a trusted adult instead.

Like the apps and games, parents can disable the AI chatbot.

The Pinwheel watch has an onboard step counter and activity monitor so that parents can keep track of how much exercise their kids are getting. Beyond that, though, wellness features are limited. For example, there's no sleep-tracking, as the device is not meant to be worn to bed.

Pinwheel smartwatch: Outlook

I'm not a parent, but if I did have a youngster between the ages of four and 14, I'd consider the Pinwheel watch. A more appropriate alternative to equipping kids with a smartphone or adult smartwatch, the Pinwheel is no pricier than those options, yet far better suited to their needs.

The biggest competitor to the Pinwheel watch in this space is the Fitbit Ace LTE. Fitbit's watch is pricier out of the gate, $230 vs. $159, but the subscription fee is $10 a month rather than $15. However, after a year, the cost of the two devices, with cellular, is roughly equal. The Fitbit ACE LTE will run you $350 while the Pinwheel will cost you $340.

I've yet to get my hands on the Ace, but based on impressions from my colleagues here at Tom's Guide, the parental controls don't seem to be as customizable and in-depth as on the Pinwheel. The Pinwheel also has a far larger pool of apps for kids to choose from.

Other players in the space include the Cosmo Jr Track 4, which I also checked out at CES. At $129, it's even more affordable than the Pinwheel watch with a similar monthly cellular cost. The Cosmo Jr also features kid-friendly apps and loads of parental controls. However, design-wise, I much prefer the look and feel of the Pinwheel.

More from Tom's Guide:

• I snowboarded down 17,000 feet of powder with the Garmin Instinct 3 — here's 5 things I learned
• I just went hands-on with the new Circular Ring 2 — and it's the most impressive smart ring at CES 2025
• I went hands-on with the Amazfit Active 2 — and it could be the new budget smartwatch to beat

The Apple Watch 10 and Fitbit Charge 6 are in separate leagues. The former is among the best smartwatch models money can buy and starts at $399. The latter is the best fitness tracker on the market and sells for $159.

Despite the massive price difference, either device is a great choice for tracking workouts, rest and recovery. Both sport onboard GPS — feel free to leave your phone at home — and support tracking for various sports and exercise types, including one of my favorite workouts, urban hikes (aka outdoor walks).

With similar post-workout stats including total step count, total distance, average and max heart rate, calories burned, average pace and more, I wanted to find out how the accuracy of tracking data between the two compares.

I’ve already tested the Apple Watch SE against the Charge 6 with Apple Watch narrowly claiming victory. Likewise, my colleague, Jane McGuire tested the Apple Watch 9 vs Fitbit Charge 6 with the Series 9 also taking the prize.

Can Apple's fitness tracking precision dominance continue? Read on.

Apple Watch 10 vs. Fitbit Charge 6: Walk test

On an overcast Seattle afternoon, I left my apartment rocking a sporty new pair of New Balance trail sneakers, a beatup Patagonia Nano Puff and a fitness tracking wearable on either wrist (Apple Watch on the left and Fitbit on the right).

As always, I manually counted my steps as a control, clicking my trusty old-school tally counter once for every one hundred paces taken (to stay sane) before restarting my count at one. I also tracked the route using Strava on my iPhone 12 mini.

Find the results below.

Apple Watch 10 vs. Fitbit Charge 6: Walk test results

In my showdown of the Apple Watch Series 10 versus the Fitbit Charge 6, both devices were within 30 steps of my actual step count total. That's an impressive result. For what it's worth, Strava's count was 5,100 steps.

The Apple Watch and Fitbit each calculated a lesser total distance than Strava, with the Charge 6's count being a full quarter mile (and change) less. Annoyingly, the Fitbit Charge 6 doesn't record elevation data, a fact that slipped my mind.

Seattle is one heck of a hilly city, so whether I'm tracking an urban hike, jog or bike ride, elevation gain metrics matter quite a bit to me. After all, there's a huge difference between walking a mile on flat ground and walking a mile with 500 feet of climb.

Pace data for my walk is all over the place. Strava automatically pauses pace data when you physically stop moving, even briefly. For example, if I yield to traffic for 30 seconds while waiting to cross the street, Strava won't hold that time against my final pace.

I walked quite briskly for this test and the Fitbit's average pace data strikes me as particularly sluggish. A 22-minute mile suggests more of a saunter than an aggressive stride.

Heart rate and calorie data between the two wearables match up more nicely. Even if the Fitbit noted a slightly higher max heart rate, the averages are comfortingly similar.

Finally, the Fitbit used half the battery power the Apple Watch used to track my roughly 50-minute walk with onboard GPS.

Apple Watch 10 vs. Fitbit Charge 6: Apple Watch wins

With a total step count that's one step closer to my actual total than the challenger, the Apple Watch Series 10 continues Cupertino's dominance over Mountain View in smart wearable tracking accuracy supremacy. This is the closest walk test result we've ever had!

That said, both devices are well equipped to handle keeping tabs on your workouts, both indoor and outdoor. They're also both fantastic motivational tools for getting out and moving more.

More from Tom's Guide

• Apple Watch 11 — all the rumors so far
• I test smartwatches for a living — my favorite wearable of 2024 is a battery-life champ
• 5 smartwatch and smart ring predictions for 2025 — Apple Watch Ultra 3, Samsung AR glasses and more

Older Google and Fitbit smartwatches are getting a major upgrade, with the training load management features introduced on the Pixel Watch 3 being rolled out to a wide range of devices.

Cardio Load and Target Load will now be available on any Google or Fitbit device that supports Fitbit’s Daily Readiness feature. The full list of supported devices is listed below, and it includes some of the best Fitbits like the Inspire 3, Versa 4 and Charge 6, and both the Pixel Watch and Pixel Watch 2.

The new features can help you manage your training load so you get fitter without risking burnout. The Cardio Load feature measures the work done by your heart throughout the day, both through workouts and general activity. Target Load gives you a score to aim for in the day based on recent activity. Both features tie into the Readiness score, which estimates how prepared your body is to tackle intense exercise each day.

All of the compatible devices will now have access to the Cardio Load and Target Load stats, along with Readiness score, without needing a Fitbit Premium subscription, which is a welcome move from Google away from locking useful stats behind a paywall.

Supported devices

Here's the full list of Pixel and Fitbit devices that will support the Cardio Load and Target Load features:

• Pixel Watch 3
• Pixel Watch 2
• Pixel Watch 1
• Fitbit Charge 6
• Fitbit Charge 5
• Fitbit Versa 4
• Fitbit Versa 3
• Fitbit Versa 2
• Fitbit Sense 2
• Fitbit Sense
• Fitbit Luxe
• Fitbit Inspire 3
• Fitbit Inspire 2

How To Use Cardio Load and Target Load

Cardio Load and Target Load are training load management features designed to help you judge the effort to put into your training and gauge the stress on your body. This kind of training load advice is a common feature on the best sports watches, and Apple also introduced training load to its smartwatches with the watchOS 11 update this year.

Google’s training load features go beyond Apple’s, however, in that they advise on how hard to train through the Target Load feature. This score is based on tracking your long- and short-term training load and gives a target that keeps those two metrics balanced.

For example, if you’ve been unable to train regularly for a few weeks you won’t be given a very high Target Load for that day, because your body might not be ready for the impact. The Cardio Load and Target Load features will help you increase your training safely so you get fitter without pushing too hard.

Is this the end of Fitbit Premium?

Google recently moved Fitbit’s readiness score from behind the Fitbit Premium paywall and made it available to all users, and with Cardio Load and Target Load coming in as well it indicates that key features on Google and Fitbit devices will no longer require a subscription going forward.

This would be a very welcome change because having to pay for a subscription to access stats and insights measured by the watch or fitness tracker you already spent hundreds of dollars on has always felt wrong to me.

There are still some insights locked behind the Fitbit Premium paywall, including advanced sleep stats and personalized running form metrics, but having the Readiness score available to all users is a big improvement in the user experience with Fitbit and Google devices.

More from Tom's Guide

• Fitbit is exiting the cheap smartwatch race — and this brand could replace it
• Apple Ring — everything we know so far about the rumored smart ring
• Smartwatch vs. adventure watch — which is best for you?

What new wearables can we expect in 2025? From a possible trio of new Apple Watches to a sleek pair of Samsung smart glasses to a redesigned Galaxy Ring, the Year of the Snake is tipped to be a blockbuster in the wild world of wearable technology.

Of course, 2024 was no slouch. We saw the debut of Samsung's first Galaxy smart ring, a true competitor to well-established and Oura Ring (which also got a refresh). The Google Pixel Watch series blossomed in its third iteration with the addition of a larger, longer-lasting 45mm model.

In addition, Samsung rolled out its first rugged Wear OS smartwatch in the Galaxy Watch Ultra. Oh, and the flagship Apple Watch 10 debuted sporting a slimmer, lighter profile with sleep apnea detection.

But all of that's in the rearview mirror. Now, it's time to look ahead to 2025 and the likely releases that will keep us on the edge of our seats.

1. Samsung Galaxy AR glasses

There's a very good possibility that we'll see Samsung's forthcoming augmented reality (AR) glasses launch sooner rather than later, with reports hinting at a January 2025 debut. At the very least we should get a tease at the event.

Similar to Meta's Ray Ban AR glasses, these high-tech specs are rumored to be sleek and stylish and meant for daily wearing.

Feature-wise, expect the Galaxy Glasses (I'm guessing the name) to play nicely with other devices in the Galaxy ecosystem, including the best Samsung phones and the Samsung Galaxy Ring, with a heavy emphasis on AI-backed features and gesture controls. Industry experts also expect that you'll be able to use the wearable to pay for items via some form of Google Pay.

We should know more soon. Rumors suggest that Samsung will launch the brand's Extended Reality (XR) platform, which the new smart glasses will run on, later this month.

2. Apple Watch Ultra 3 and SE 3

I can't lie. I was a bit disappointed when Apple's fall product announcements didn't include a refresh of the Apple Watch Ultra or SE lines. Based on the brand's prior launch cycles, both devices seemed likely.

The first Apple Watch Ultra launched in 2022 with the Ultra 2 refresh coming a year later in 2023. Similarly, the Apple Watch SE first debuted in 2020 with the SE 2 following in 2022. Clearly, annual and bi-annual updates for both of those lines are no longer the norm.

Or maybe Cupertino is simply cooking up something extra special and groundbreaking for the refresh of both lines? Either way, I expect to see an Apple Watch Ultra 2 and Apple Watch SE 3 arrive in the fall of 2025.

With the current-gen SE selling for $100 off the week of Black Friday and beyond, it's obvious that retailers are trying to clear out inventory. So, what will Apple's new budget-friendly smartwatch model offer? Apple Watch SE 3 rumors suggest the case material may switch from metal to plastic to keep costs and weight down.

There are also hints that the new device will launch at $149 which is coincidentally the same price the SE 2 was just going for after discounts. Hmm. Finally, a larger case size option may be on offer. Better even yet, we may see the Apple Watch SE 3 launch with a new iPhone SE model as soon as Spring 2025. The Ultra 3, meanwhile, will more likely make its debut in the fall.

Unlike the SE 3, Apple Watch Ultra 3 rumors are less plentiful. The good news is that there's a very strong possibility both of these new devices will support Apple Intelligence, bringing the company's best AI tools to your wrist.

3. Apple Watch Series 11

While we're on the subject of Apple Watches, I might as well acknowledge the fact that an Apple Watch Series 11 is all but certain to debut in 2025, and likely with some cool Apple Intelligence-based features showcased. Unlike the SE and the Ultra, Apple has refreshed the flagship smartwatch line every year for a decade straight and I don't expect that to change in the coming year.

However, like the Apple Watch Ultra 3, details on the Series 11 are scant. Still, I can wishfully speculate. There's been a lot of chatter about MicroLED technology lately. And for good reason. The standard Apple Watch line has been stuck at the same battery life for years.

Like the original model from 2014, the current Apple Watch Series 10 boasts just 18 hours of battery under normal operating conditions. A switch to MicroLED screens could change that. Not only is the technology notably more power efficient than OLED but a move to MicroLED could also bring about improvements to screen brightness, resolution, saturation and color accuracy.

There's also been reports that Apple has been investigating ways to bring blood pressure monitoring and perhaps even blood-glucose tracking to the Apple Watch, but there's no definitive timetable.

4. Samsung Galaxy Ring 2

It seems like only yesterday Samsung debuted its first smart ring when in reality, the Galaxy Ring was launched in January 2024. Of course, we had to wait until summertime to finally get our hands on one. When we did, it impressed us, earning the team's respect as the best Oura Ring alternative.

The finger-based wearable may still be wet behind the ears but rumors of a follow-up abound. According to one leaker, the Galaxy Ring 2 will sport a thinner and lighter design with better battery life and additional features. Specifics are notably lacking, though.

While we may get a sneak peek at the ring during the expected January launch of the Samsung S25 smartphone, my guess is we'll have to wait several months more before the product is actually available for purchase.

5. No new Fitbits

Google went ahead and put the kibosh on the Fitbit Sense and Fitbit Versa smartwatch lines in 2024. In 2025, I expect more of the same. As of writing, only the entry-level Fitbit Inspire 3, mid-range Fitbit Charge 6 and kid-centric Fitbit Ace LTE remain.

So, which will be the next Fitbit model to have the plug pulled? I'd rather not speculate, though the ACE is less than a year old, so I doubt it will be that. Either way, the end for the Inspire and Charge lines will be unceremonious and likely go mostly unacknowledged by Google. This is all to say, I don't expect a Fitbit Inspire 4 or Fitbit Charge 7 in 2025. (Though I'll be pleasantly surprised if I'm wrong).

More from Tom's Guide:

• Fitbit is exiting the cheap smartwatch race — and this brand could replace it
• Apple Ring — everything we know so far about the rumored smart ring
• Smartwatch vs. adventure watch — which is best for you?