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
| Header Cell - Column 0 | Fitbit Air | Apple Watch Ultra 3 | Control |
|---|---|---|---|
Steps | 4,375 steps | 4,469 steps | 4,500 (manual count) |
Distance | 2.36 miles | 2.39 miles | 2.45 miles (Strava) |
Climb | No data | 377 feet | 360 feet (Strava) |
Average pace | 18 mins 11 secs | 17 mins 44 secs | 17 mins 21 secs (Strava) |
Average heart rate | 133 bpm | 138 bpm | n/a |
Max heart rate | 165 bpm | 166 bpm | n/a |
Calories burned | 354 calories | 371 calories | n/a |
Battery usage | 1% | 4% | n/a |
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.
Follow Tom's Guide on Google News and add us as a preferred source to get our up-to-date news, analysis, and reviews in your feeds.
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
