• Latest Garmin rumors point to details on the Garmin Fenix 9
• We could get three sizes
• And MIP solar technology may not be dead yet

The Garmin Fenix 9 range is likely to be arriving soon. The rumor mill, fuelled by comments made by CEO Cliff Pemble on Garmin's quarterly earnings call earlier this year, suggest this is going to be the case. But plenty of Garmin fans were wondering how the Fenix 9 line would look.

The Garmin Fenix 8 line came in three sizes (43mm, 47mm and 51mm), and two screen options: a standard bright AMOLED screen of the sort you see on many smartwatches, and a duller memory-in-pixel (MIP) varient with solar charging. The MIP displays used to be used on all of the best Garmin watches as it was more battery-efficient, but these days it's almost entirely used for models that use Garmin's Power Glass solar charging tech, which uses a solar panel behind the display to suck up lumens and extend the watch's battery life in bright conditions.

It's likely that once Garmin figures out how to do the same with its AMOLED watches, MIP screens will bite the dust permanently, which is a shame. There are lots of fans of the lower-power screen tech, as this poll suggests.

A year after the already-premium Garmin Fenix 8 line entered the fray, we got the Garmin Fenix 8 Pro, a model which came in two sizes (47mm and 51mm) with InReach messaging connectivity using Garmin's satellite communication network, LTE which uses a standard internet connection, and on some models an even brighter MicroLED screen.

So, where does that leave the upcoming Fenix 9?

Three sizes, two Pros, two MIP displays

According to Garmin Rumors, the Garmin Fenix 9 will arrive in three sizes like its predecessor, and in three different models; the base version, the Garmin Fenix 9 Pro (with the release not being staggered like the Fenix 8/Pro) and the Garmin Fenix 9 Pro InReach.

This time, all three models are said to be arriving in all three sizes, so those with smaller wrists are still getting the Pro experience. The Fenix 9 Pro InReach is obviously getting access to Garmin's satellite network for off-the-grid messaging, but GarminRumors is not sure what upgrades the Pro will sport over the base model. Apart from one.

Both the Garmin Fenix 9 Pro and Pro InReach are said to be getting Solar models, which means the MIP screen would be back for another generation — but the standard Garmin Fenix 9 will remain an AMOLED watch. This would be the first time a standard Garmin Fenix won't get an MIP model, but it does make sense if Garmin is now reserving its solar charging for its premium Pro models.

If true, it's a shame. The MIP display isn't just a vehicle for solar charging: its lower-power technology is reminiscent of a digital watch, and as well as being more battery efficient, it's a way for Garmin users to distinguish their training tools from other, say, Apple and Samsung smartwatches. There's also no info on the Garmin Enduro 4.

We'll have more details on the Fenix 9 range as we get closer to its likely launch date. Stay tuned!

Garmin Cirqa: One minute review

I’ve spent a week with the Garmin Cirqa screenless fitness tracker, wearing it constantly during sleep, exercise and rest to determine how comfortable it is in everyday life, and measuring it against an electrical heart rate monitor and other wearables to determine accuracy.

After all my testing, I can confirm the Whoop and Google Fitbit Air have got serious competition. While some people will still want the AI-powered coaching from Whoop and Google Health, and others will want the screen-based interaction and notification features available on the best smartwatches, most users looking for a simple but high-quality screenless fitness tracker will be just fine getting the Cirqa.

If you’re reading this review wondering how it compares to the likes of the Whoop MG and the Google Fitbit Air, you’ll already know what to expect from the design: a fabric band that stretches over the fitness tracker’s plastic puck to create a solid-color screenless wearable. The idea is that you can use it for working out, sleeping, rest and work, get accurate metrics all day, and not glance at it all the time or be distracted by notifications on your wrist.

Where it differs is in the design specifics. It’s quite a large fitness tracker, sitting more obviously on the wrist compared to its rivals, and thus people with very small wrists might want to try it before they commit. However, I like the design overall, especially the inclusion of an actual button on the side of the device. This button is used to start a workout, signified by a strong vibration, and stop a workout, at which point it vibrates again. You can also use it to turn off its vibrating smart-wake alarm. It’s so much easier than tapping the Whoop’s puck, and provides certainty and security when tracking an activity, so you're not just hoping the device picks it up. It’s the perfect level of minimalist interaction for a tracker like this.

I generally found it accurate over my testing period, apart from a single outlier workout in which the heart rate sensor showed a 10BPM difference compared to my electrical heart rate monitor, the Polar H10 — my accuracy benchmark. The other workouts I recorded were within 1-2bpm of accuracy, and Garmin Connect correctly showed my wake-up times when recording sleep.

I found myself enjoying running more than I have in months by ‘vibe running’: ditching my watch with its pace and heart rate metrics updating me every kilometer and allowing the Cirqa to track in the background, leaving me to focus on my form, the trees, my music and my thoughts. It’s no good for specific training for timed runs, new courses, intervals and the like due to the lack of on-wrist information, but for wellness tracking, it works nicely.

It’s going to be a real boon for cyclists using Garmin’s Edge series of cycling computers. Many of the best Garmin watches double-up on the cycling computer's GPS features, so the Cirqa allows cyclists to add wellness metrics without a more expensive watch.

Watch our video review of the Garmin Cirqa here:

Garmin Cirqa review: Price and availability

• $199.99 in the US
• £179.99 in the UK
• AU$299.99 in the AU

The Garmin Cirqa fitness tracker costs $199.99 in the US, £179.99 in the UK and AU$299.99 in Australia. There’s no subscription fee — at least, no mandatory one — but Garmin Coach features are locked behind the Garmin Connect+ paywall in the app, which costs an extra $6.99 / £6.99 / AU$12 per month or $69.99 / £69.99 / AU$120 annually. A bicep band for the Cirqa comes at an added extra too.

You can get along just fine without the subscription, if you don’t want the coaching features. Live heart rate broadcasting was also originally locked behind this paywall, but Garmin rolled that back after an outcry. The free tier of Connect is an excellent training aid, and isn’t as stripped-back as the free tier of the Google Health app you use with the Google Fitbit Air. However, the Cirqa is also twice the price of Fitbit, so this is reflected in the price, and Connect (being Garmin’s app for all its devices) lists some stats you don’t get access to via the Cirqa if you dig a little deeper, leading to some annoying friction moments.

However, for most people, it’s better value than Whoop, which requires an annual subscription starting at £169 / $199 / AU$299 and going up from there. With Whoop, you never actually own either the device or the data you collect, merely rent it. With two years of the cheapest Whoop subscription, you could also buy a cheap Garmin running watch like the Garmin Forerunner 165 as well as a Cirqa and alternate between the two of them for many years.

While serious athletes such as CrossFit and Hyrox enthusiasts will want Whoop’s vast swathes of unique metrics such as the Strain score and AI-powered workout building features, the Cirqa’s subscription-free tier is much more affordable and better value for most, despite the relatively high price of the tracker itself compared to some of Garmin's more feature-rich running watches.

• Value score: 3.5/5

Garmin Cirqa review: Design

• Choice of four colors
• Screenless form factor
• Tactile button

The Garmin Cirqa is a simple design. A fabric band with four color options — Mauve, French Grey, Captain Blue and Black — wraps around a plastic puck with Garmin’s Elevate V4 heart rate sensor array. The puck is slightly curved to mimic the wrist’s shape, and as previously mentioned, it includes a ridged button on the side to start and stop workouts.

The design is very simple, and the button is the only way to interact with the puck. It’s very comfortable to wear, weighing only 21g, and light enough and comfortable enough that I often forgot I was wearing it during the week. That made wearing it for sleep and exercise a frictionless experience, and the band is soft to the touch.

It’s quite large for a ‘discreet’ band due to the size of Garmin’s Elevate V4 sensor, but not uncomfortable — at least, for my wrists. Those with very thin wrists may struggle, but I was told the more up-to-date Elevate V5 sensor would have made the puck even bigger.

I’ve always been a fan of the Garmin Connect app, and its design is really comprehensive. It can be difficult to navigate at first due to the breadth of information on offer, meaning some stats and features get lost in the mix, but once you’re used to it, it’s easy to access a lot of detail along with community features such as challenges.

• Design score: 4.5/5

Garmin Cirqa review: Features

• Deliberately hardware feature-light
• Plenty of detailed metrics
• Not as many as a full Garmin watch, or Whoop

There are very few interactive features on the Garmin Cirqa puck; you can start and stop workouts, or stop an alarm, but that’s more or less it. However, the information the Cirqa collects and shows you in the app aren't lacking in detail.

The Garmin Cirqa tracker collects data on sleep stages, heart rate variability (HRV), pulse ox and provides Garmin’s Training Readiness and Body Battery scores. Garmin’s Sleep Coach feature can recommend bedtimes and sleep length, letting you know if you’re in a sleep deficit, and smart wake alarm using the device’s haptic sensors buzzes on your wrist in a light sleep stage to wake you within a pre-prescribed window.

Automatic activity detection means the Cirqa quietly records activities lasting longer than 15 minutes, such as walks, which become more accurate if you amend the detected activities in the Garmin Connect app, including extending or trimming the duration. Alternatively, you can simply press the button to start a timed activity, and again amend in-app.

While you won’t get advanced running features like many Garmin watches, such as cadence, stride length, Hill Score (based on elevation) and so on, you still get generic training information like heart rate, VO2 Max and Training Load, which can help you tell you if you’re under or overtraining. Garmin also carries features like Fitness Age, which uses heart rate and activity data to tell you how well your body performs compared to its actual age. Whoop has a similar feature named Whoop Age — another example of the Cirqa eating Whoop’s lunch here.

You get quite a lot for your money. There's a small value issue, though: it’s not packing quite as many features as the premium Whoop subscriptions, nor a watch like the Garmin Forerunner 165, which gets you all of the above plus dedicated GPS, running and notification features for the same price. But it also comes with a screen, which you might not want. The Cirqa avoids bloat, prioritising the fitness and recovery metrics users want to see and eliminating the interactive features that screenless wearables fans don't want at all.

As well as the Garmin Coach features, AI-powered photograph-based nutrition tracking and AI-generated training insights are also available as part of Garmin’s premium Connect+ tier.

• Features score: 4/5

Garmin Cirqa review: Performance

• Accurate workout metrics, aside from one outlying workout
• Sleep tracking was competent
• Comfy and easy to wear

I tested the Garmin Cirqa for around nine days, performing several workouts compared against a Polar H10 heart rate monitor, tracking my sleep, and draining the battery. If you’re working out three to four times a week and enabling auto-detection for walks and other activities, it lasts a solid week between charges — I topped mine up on day seven of testing.

It recorded my sleep well and correctly identified wake-up times in the middle of the night and in the early hours of the morning. If I slept well or went to bed early, the Cirqa correctly identified this and the numbers matched my energy levels and perceived sleep quality. If I got up in the middle of the night (which I often do several nights out of the week), the Cirqa clocked it. Its sleep stages graph is easy to parse, while Sleep Score and HRV are sortable by the last week, month or year to show trends.

When it comes to measuring workout accuracy, while there’s no GPS to draw from other than piggybacking off my phone, the Cirqa closely matched my Polar H10 heart rate monitor during workouts. There was one instance in which it was an average of 10bpm off during a 40-minute strength session in the gym, but other workouts cleaved very closely to the HRM, within 2-3bpm accuracy (as you can see below). My guess is that if that particular workout was longer, the readings would have evened out.

Like other Garmin devices using the Elevate V4, the Cirqa is generally accurate enough for anyone who doesn’t need elite-level metrics, at which point they’d be using a heart rate monitor or Garmin’s Elevate V5. But even record-breaker Sebastian Sawe was spotted using a Garmin Forerunner 55, which uses a V4, during his sub-two hour London Marathon run.

I can’t overstate how nice the Cirqa is to wear. I found it a better daily driver than the Whoop band, despite its size, largely due to the Whoop’s often-detaching clasp. The tactile button gave me a sense of certainty in my recording, and I didn’t have to open the app to manually start a workout like the Google Fitbit Air if I wanted to be accurate. The haptics are nice and strong too.

• Performance score: 4.5/5

Garmin Cirqa review: Scorecard

Garmin Cirqa review: Should I buy?

Buy it if…

Don’t buy it if…

Also consider

How I tested

I tested the Garmin Cirqa for over one week, draining the battery down and wearing it constantly during sleep, work, exercise and rest. I undertook multiple workouts, comparing them to a Polar H10 electrical heart rate monitor for accuracy, and compared its featureset to its peers in the screenless fitness tracker market.

First reviewed: August 2026

• Whoop has partnered with women's health tracking app Natural Cycles
• Whoop users get one year of the app totally free
• Natural Cycles will use that data to provide a 'daily fertility status' through its app

Whoop has partnered with women's health tracking app Natural Cycles, offering a year's worth of membership to existing Whoop users free of charge.

Whoop users also using the Natural Cycles app can now enable their Whoop app to import skin temperature data into Natural Cycles, said to 'eliminate the need for manual daily tracking' using a fingertip sensor or similar. Natural Cycles will incorporate this data to provide a daily fertility status, as basal body temperature is a key indicator in cycle tracking.

“At Natural Cycles, we're committed to making digital contraception as seamless as possible for our users," Dr. Magda Armbruster, VP of Product at Natural Cycles, said in a statement.

"Integrating with WHOOP removes friction from the experience by allowing members to use the wearable they already rely on to automatically capture overnight skin temperature used by the NC° app to determine daily fertility status."

It's worth noting the integration is only available with Whoop MG and Whoop 5.0 devices: anyone still rocking the Whoop 4.0 is unfortunately left out in the cold.

Whoop isn't the only wearable that Natural Cycles works with. Natural Cycles can use data from Whoop's fellow subscription-powered premium wearable, the Oura Ring, as well as the best Garmin devices and Natural Cycles' own NC Band.

Natural Cycles costs $149.99 in the US, £89.99 in the UK or AU$149.99 in Australia, so you're saving a packet here.

Natural Cycles is unusual for a women's health tracking app in that it claims to be the 'only FDA-cleared, hormone-free birth control app'. Clearance from the US Food & Drug Administration is a badge of quality in the consumer health tech space.

The Whoop's recently seeing a new challenger in the screenless smart band form factor: the Garmin Cirqa. You can watch our video review of the device below.

• Casio has two new watches and a new smart ring
• All these models offer some kind of fitness tracking too
• We're still waiting on international availability

Casio is pushing further into wearables that can be used as fitness trackers and not just timepieces, with a couple of new watches and a revised version of its smart ring that can monitor some key health metrics while you're wearing them.

The smart ring is the Casio CRW-H001 (via Notebookcheck), which looks like a tiny watch that you slip on your finger — but can also keep tabs on steps, sleep, heart rate, and body temperature according to the product blurb. You can also use it to get alerts about incoming smartphone notifications.

It's a significant step up from the Casio CRW-001-1JR that was launched in 2024. That device was limited to telling the time, setting alarms, and stopwatch timers. There was no companion mobile app and nothing in the way of fitness tracking.

This latest version is a genuine smart ring, though for now it's only available in China for 1,990 yuan (about $295 / £220 / AU$420). Given that the Casio CRW-001-1JR eventually made its way to international markets, we're hopeful that this device will too.

New watches too

On to the watches, and we have the new Casio ABL-100WE series on the Casio UK website (via Notebookcheck again): there's the ABL-100WE-2A (with a black finish) and the ABL-100WE-7A (with a silver finish).

Alongside the classic Casio looks, these watches give you step counting that can be synced to a smartphone via Bluetooth and displayed on the built-in screen. Extra features include water resistance and dual time zone support.

You don't get much in the way of fitness tracking, but it's something — the watches can send you alerts about meeting your step count goal for each day, if you want, and you're also able to see your recent progress in the form of simple graphs. Both models come with multi-row stainless steel bracelets.

For now these models have been spotted on Casio's UK website — where they're retailing for £70 (about $95) — and an official distributor in Australia for AU$249 — so as with the smart ring we're waiting for news on further global availability.

I didn't realize I'd developed an unhealthy obsession with wellness and optimization. But looking back, there were definitely signs. This was more than a decade ago, long before recovery scores, longevity influencers and what the best smart ring colors are became water cooler conversation.

As a technology journalist, reviewing health gadgets and fitness trackers has always been part of my job but they gradually spilled over into my personal life too. At one point, I was wearing multiple fitness trackers at the same time because I didn't fully trust any single device. I'd compare the data, then transfer it into spreadsheets each night so I could better analyze it myself.

Most days I walked more than 20,000 steps. Some days it was closer to 30,000 and I got such a kick out of seeing those numbers climb up. I became fascinated by the idea that there was an optimal way to do almost everything. An optimal diet, optimal morning routine, optimal supplement stack and an optimal sleep schedule.

Every new wellness trend arrived with the promise of hidden knowledge and I was eager to believe it. I spent money on retreats, courses and gadgets. I followed advice that ranged from questionable to ridiculous. And the less said about the gruelling fasting retreat where we were all given daily wheatgrass enemas, the better.

The strange thing is that none of this felt unhealthy at the time — if anything, it felt virtuous. My trackers congratulated me for hitting goals and fitness apps handed out badges and streaks. There was always another target to hit and another metric to improve. The obsession disguised itself as self-improvement so effectively that I barely questioned it.

What I didn't understand at the time was how thin the line between discipline and obsession can be. You can cross it gradually, one habit and one goal at a time, until something that started as a genuine attempt to look after yourself becomes another source of pressure, anxiety and control.

More than a decade later, as wearables, recovery scores and optimization culture have since become mainstream, I don't think my experience is unusual. If anything, I'm surprised we don't talk more about the psychological cost of constantly measuring ourselves and the role technology plays in keeping us focused on the numbers.

Why health data can become a trap

For a long time, I assumed my experience was unusual. When my obsession with optimization was at its worst, there weren't podcasters talking about longevity-maxxing and relatively few people owned fitness trackers.

Over time, I managed to develop a healthier relationship with exercise and health data. But as wearables have become more common and self-tracking has moved into the mainstream, I've started noticing some of the same patterns I once recognized in myself.

When I spoke to psychotherapist Sarah Dosanjh, who works with people experiencing health anxiety and disordered relationships with food, much of what I'd experienced sounded familiar.

"What I'm noticing in my practice is that people who already have some form of anxiety seem particularly drawn to health data technology devices," she says. "An anxious client seeks certainty and control and health information feeds a sense of control, making it very appealing to an anxious person."

Looking back, some of the periods when I was most immersed in tracking and optimization were also periods when other parts of my life felt uncertain or difficult. The data gave me something concrete to focus on. It offered numbers, targets and routines at times when everything else felt far less predictable.

Dosanjh explains the irony is that tools designed to help people feel more in control can backfire. "The most common devices I see people struggling with are food and exercise tracking apps and continuous glucose monitoring devices," Dosanjh says. "But what starts as feeling in control can quickly turn into feeling controlled by the technology."

She describes people becoming increasingly preoccupied with maintaining specific numbers and avoiding anything that might disrupt them.

"Closing exercise rings, achieving a certain step count and keeping blood sugar within a specific range can turn into a compulsion,” she tells me. “Anxiety peaks at the mere thought of not hitting numbers. What feels like a good thing to do for your health can become a source of intense anxiety instead."

These behaviors rarely look unhealthy from the outside. Going for a walk, exercising regularly or paying attention to what you eat are generally considered positive things. The difficulty is knowing when useful habits become rigid rules and when health stops being something that supports your life and starts becoming the thing your life revolves around.

Dosanjh says that cycle can become self-reinforcing. "This situation becomes more dangerous when the person believes they can manage this added anxiety by setting even higher goals,” she explains. “They are chasing the initial relief and dopamine hit that they experienced early on in their tech use. It can become an addictive trap, driving people further into disordered eating and compulsive exercise."

I think that’s what makes optimization culture so difficult to talk about. For some people, tracking genuinely is helpful. It can encourage movement, show them useful patterns and provide much-needed motivation via streaks and digital rewards, such as badges and kudos from other users. For others, particularly those already vulnerable to anxiety, perfectionism or compulsive tendencies already, the same tools can pull them further down a path they may not even realise they're on.

When tracking went mainstream

When I first started reviewing fitness trackers, this kind of behavior felt relatively niche. Most people weren't tracking their sleep. Very few people knew what heart rate variability was. The idea of waking up and checking a readiness score before deciding how hard to exercise would have sounded bizarre. But today, optimization is everywhere.

More than 45% of people in the UK and around 60% of people in the US now own a smartwatch or fitness wearable. Even if you don't actively seek out health tracking, many of the features, like step counts and calorie estimates, are now built directly into devices like Apple Watches or smartphones that we all use every day.

Despite this, researchers are still trying to understand the psychological impact of living with a constant stream of biometric data. There's no clear evidence that large numbers of wearable users are developing serious problems. But a growing body of research does point towards some worrying patterns. Several studies have linked fitness tracking technologies with increased anxiety, body dissatisfaction and rumination. Others have found associations between wearable use and higher levels of obsessive-compulsive traits, like perfectionism and over-conscientiousness.

I found that one study even introduced a new term: technohypochondria. Researchers defined it through three features: biometric data obsession, digital catastrophizing and a pathological need for algorithmic feedback. Unlike traditional health anxiety, which tends to focus on illness itself, technohypochondria describes a dependence on the continuous flow of personalized health data and the reassurance it appears to provide. I guess I’m a recovering technohypochondriac?

What I found particularly interesting was that researchers working on one of the key studies raised a really important question: “are people with pre-existing compulsive tendencies more drawn to wearables, or do continuous tracking and feedback loops foster or exacerbate these tendencies?”

It’s a chicken-and-egg sort of question and the answer is probably complicated. But the researchers do suggest a feedback loop may exist, where pre-existing vulnerabilities and constant self-tracking reinforce one another.

None of this means that everyone who wears a smartwatch is heading towards a crisis. I know personally that I did already have compulsive tendencies and controlling behaviors with food long before Fitbit released its first device. But I think it does suggest that the emotional impact of optimization deserves more attention than it often receives. Because once tracking becomes woven into everyday life, it can be surprisingly difficult to tell where useful information ends and unhealthy fixation begins.

When the numbers become the point

When I asked my friends and followers on social media to share their experiences with wearables and health tracking, I expected a handful of disparate stories. Instead, I heard from people who described becoming trapped by numbers in ways that felt extremely familiar.

Some were dealing with chronic illness. Others were recovering from major health events. Some simply wanted to get fitter or sleep better. But again and again, there was the same pattern. What began as a search for reassurance gradually became another source of anxiety.

I spoke to Emma, who started relying heavily on health data after cancer treatment and surgical menopause left her worried about the long-term impact on her health. "My watch became reassuring," she tells me. "I thought if my heart rate looks normal, I'm probably okay."

But over time that reassurance became its own form of dependence. "It felt like I was controlling my health anxiety," she says. "But I think I was just making it worse."

Sarah, who has used wearables for years while managing endometriosis and dysautonomia, described a different concern. "I wake up and let Oura tell me if I've slept well and then Visible gives me a score for the day, and that just feels wrong," she says. What impacted her most was the lack of trust she had in her own judgement. "I think it's made me lose trust in myself a little. Am I actually tired and am I really that stressed because an app said so?"

I think that gets to the heart of what can make continuous tracking so complicated. The problem isn't necessarily that you’re looking at data a lot — the problem is what happens when the data becomes more important than your own lived experience.

Understanding the cycle

Even though all of the stories I heard about wearables were different, a common thread was just how many seemed to be born from a feeling of trying to manage uncertainty.

Many of the people who contacted me weren't trying to become superhuman, chase longevity records or optimize every minute of their lives when they first started tracking. They were dealing with health scares, chronic illnesses, anxiety, weight issues and burnout.

And the data that their wearables collected offered reassurance. But the problem is that reassurance doesn't tend to last.

"Many of my clients understand that something doesn't feel quite right about their technology use, but they are afraid to stop using it," Dosanjh tells me.

She often explains this through what psychologists call the anxiety cycle. It starts with uncertainty. Am I healthy? Am I eating the right thing? Am I doing enough? The device provides an answer, whether that's a sleep score, a heart rate reading or a closed exercise ring. The anxiety temporarily decreases and the brain learns that checking the data creates relief.

But, over time, that starts to fade. "The temporary relief that comes from hitting a target or seeing a reassuring number keeps feeding the illusion of mastery over your health," Dosanjh explains. "Helping clients understand that what they are seeking in the tech is certainty, and since complete certainty is impossible, the focus of our work moves from trying to eliminate anxiety to developing the capacity to tolerate uncertainty."

That really describes my own experience. The more I tracked, the more I felt I needed to track. The more information I had, the more information I wanted. The pursuit of health slowly became the pursuit of certainty, which, as we all know logically, isn’t something you can ever get, achieve or “win” at.

What actually helped me

A big part of getting better was realizing that my obsession with health data wasn't really about the health data at all.

Looking back, some of the periods when I was most preoccupied with optimization were also periods when other parts of my life felt difficult, uncertain or out of my control. The trackers gave me something concrete to focus on. There was always another metric to improve, another target to hit, another problem that seemed solvable.

But many of the things I was actually struggling with couldn't be fixed with a spreadsheet or a sleep score. Therapy helped me recognize that pattern. So did learning to tolerate uncertainty a little better. Over time, I became less interested in controlling every variable and more interested in understanding why I felt the need to control them in the first place.

That doesn't mean the tendency completely disappeared, I still recognize it in myself from time to time. The difference is that now I see it for what it is and can catch the early warning signs.

Should wearables be designed differently?

I don't think every fitness tracker needs to be redesigned around people like me. The most effective intervention for my own unhealthy behavior was surprisingly simple: I took all the devices off. But some researchers argue that the design of wearables does deserve more attention.

One of the studies I looked at found that some of the negative psychological effects associated with fitness technologies could be linked to the features themselves. Feedback systems, gamified rewards, social comparison tools, constant notifications and the stream of immediate statistics can all encourage people to engage more frequently with the data, sometimes in ways that become unhelpful.

The researchers believe that psychological wellbeing should be treated as an important measure of success alongside more familiar metrics, like engagement, accuracy and battery life.

That doesn't necessarily mean removing goals or progress tracking. But it could mean giving people more control over how they interact with the technology.

Based on what I’ve seen from years reviewing wearables, that could mean less judgemental language, fewer alarming warnings, more ways to take breaks without feeling punished, and more flexibility over what data is displayed and when.

Most wearable companies already offer some degree of customization. Yet many products are still built around the assumption that more engagement is always better. In many cases that's true; regular use makes the data more useful over time because you can see patterns and track trends. But there should always be room for people to step back when they need to. A healthy relationship with wearable technology shouldn't require constant engagement, and users shouldn't feel punished for taking a break.

Health should improve your life, not become your life

The irony is that I became interested in health and fitness because it genuinely helped me. I learned from a really young age that exercise improved my mood, moving more reduced my anxiety and looking after myself made life feel calmer and more manageable. But I started paying way too little attention to how I felt and too much attention to what the numbers said.

These days, I still review fitness technology and sometimes still wear trackers outside of work. But I pay attention to different things now. If I feel guilty taking a device off, that's a warning sign. So is chasing a target despite being exhausted and spending more time thinking about the data than paying attention to my actual experience.

But most importantly, I ask myself what else is going on. Because when I feel like I’m becoming overly fixated on optimization, there's often something else happening underneath. Data is usually not the cause. It's just where all that energy and anxiety ends up being funnelled.

Dosanjh encourages people to approach health data as information rather than instruction. "Health tech should be an enhancement in your life and not an additional source of stress," she says. "Prioritize your wellbeing over optimization."

She also encourages people to regularly check whether the technology is still serving the purpose they originally bought it for. "How you feel is a more helpful barometer of wellness than numerical data. Be clear about your reasons for using the tech and check they align with your life values,” she says.

That's the lesson I wish I'd understood years ago. Health should improve your life but not become your life. Because no matter how sophisticated our trackers are there are still some things they can't measure. Like whether you have enough energy to spend time with the people you love, whether you're enjoying your life and whether you're actually feeling well. Those are infinitely more important than if you hit 10,000 steps today.

The Garmin Cirqa is a strong new addition to Garmin's ecosystem of devices. It's a screenless fitness tracker like a Whoop band, working with the Garmin Connect app to track sleep, workouts, and health metrics. You can read all about what happened when I tested the Garmin Cirqa against a heart rate monitor during its UK launch event here.

One under-the-radar announcement most people have glossed over is that even though most features are subscription-free, you need a Garmin Connect+ subscription to access Garmin Coach. This is Garmin's digital coaching feature, offering personalized training plans for its users to help achieve their strength, running, or cycling goals.

The reason this is important is that it's the first time Garmin Coach has been locked behind a paywall. It used to be that more expensive watches came with Garmin Coach features, while less expensive watches didn't. That was it. This latest development means we could see future budget-friendly Garmin offerings, such as the successor to the Garmin Forerunner 70, get Garmin Coach capabilities but keep them locked behind Connect+ in order to keep costs down.

While this is very much in line with how Fitbit and Apple run things on their fitness apps, it's a big change for Garmin and one that could rile existing users. We've seen how the Garmin community reacted to Connect+ when it was first introduced last year — negatively, with many people fearing new watch features would be locked behind a paywall, as ongoing subscriptions are very profitable for tech companies.

At least it's still substantially better value than Whoop's pay-annually mandatory subscription model.

Garmin acquires TrainingPeaks and TrainHeroic

Garmin has acquired TrainingPeaks and its sibling platform TrainHeroic. TrainingPeaks is an incredibly popular cross-platform programming software where users can download and use fitness plans and communicate directly with coaches. It's available on lots of different devices, not just Garmin watches.

Naturally, many people are afraid this means TrainingPeaks will become a Garmin-exclusive piece of software, and anyone who currently uses, for example, an Apple Watch Ultra 3 will be left in the cold. Even those that use it on Garmins may fear another subscription will be required.

Our homes editor and ex-fitness editor Cat Ellis uses TrainingPeaks to train for her marathons. She said: "I use TrainingPeaks and a Garmin watch, so I’m interested in what the future will hold as the two become intertwined — but also concerned for owners of non-Garmin devices. It seems plausible that owners of devices from other brands — such as Polar, Suunto, and Amazfit — might be left out if Garmin folds TrainingPeaks plans into Garmin Connect+.

"I’m also curious how Garmin might integrate TrainingPeaks. Will there be a separate Connect+ membership tier that unlocks access to TrainingPeaks plans? What about plans from coaches that TrainingPeaks users currently pay for separately? It’s going to be an interesting time."

Watch our Garmin Cirqa hands-on on our TikTok below:

Cross-platform confirmation

TrainingPeaks & TrainHeroic MD Lee Gerakos told DC Rainmaker that "TrainingPeaks will continue to operate as a cross-platform ecosystem, enabling athletes and coaches to use the devices, platforms and services that best suit their needs."

TrainingPeaks users can breathe a sigh of relief, for now — but it's not hard to connect the dots. Garmin's most recent, highest-profile product puts its coaching features behind a paywall at the same time it announces the acquisition of one of the most popular third-party coaching platforms. Garmin could be aiming to improve its coaching platform to get more people to join Connect+.

This isn't a bad thing per se — much of the criticism levelled at Connect+ was that its offering was a bit thin — but the pressure will be on for Garmin to keep its existing users, along with existing TrainingPeaks and TrainHeroic users, happy with how the new coaching features are implemented.

• Live heart rate data will be free for Garmin Cirqa users
• Early testers noticed it had been put behind the Connect+ subscription
• The new tracker costs $199.99 / £179.99 / AU$299.99

We've already put the newly unveiled Garmin Cirqa through an extensive hands-on testing session, and came away very impressed. However, there were complaints from those who had early access to the device that live heart rate data was locked behind a paywall.

Now Garmin is taking that negative feedback on board: as reported by seasoned tech reporter Ray Maker (via Android Police), live heart rate data will be available to every Cirqa user "in the coming days", with or without a Garmin Connect+ subscription.

The subscription, which applies across all of Garmin's wearables, has been the subject of much debate since it launched last year. For $6.99 / £6.99 / AU$12 per month or $69.99 / £69.99 / AU$120 a year, it gives you access to more metrics and more insights about the fitness data you're amassing.

Live heart rate readings aren't usually locked behind Connect+, so it's strange that Garmin initially made this the case with the Cirqa. Whatever the reasoning or confusion, the anomaly is now being dealt with, which is good news.

The rise of subscriptions

If you're new to the Garmin Cirqa (and it was only announced a few days ago), it takes on the likes of the Whoop wearables and the Fitbit Air by giving you a capable, lightweight wrist tracker without the distraction (and battery drain) of a display.

Both the Cirqa and the Fitbit Air offer basic tracking features and functionality for free, with a pile of extras available if you sign up for a subscription. With Whoop bands, like the Whoop MG, a subscription is compulsory, otherwise it's pretty much useless — plans start at $199 / £169 / AU$299 per year.

As we've written about before, it's a sign of the times that so many tech devices, from smartwatches to security cameras, now come with monthly subscriptions attached — usually stealing away the best features for the device in question.

If you're tempted by a Garmin Cirqa and its display-free design, it's available for $199.99 / £179.99 / AU$299.99 direct from Garmin, with availability from tomorrow, July 24 — and you will be able to record real time heart rate data, via the accompanying Garmin app.

• There was very little mention of the Samsung Galaxy Ring at this year's Unpacked presentation
• Nevertheless, it sounds like a Galaxy Ring 2 is coming
• I interviewed Annika Bizon, VP of Product and Marketing for Mobile Experience, who gave me the inside scoop

What a day! We've just seen Samsung's vision for the future of wearables at Samsung Galaxy Unpacked, including its AR glasses and the new Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 and Watch 9.

However, conspicuous by its absence was the next iteration of Samsung's smallest wearable, the Samsung Galaxy Ring. While Samsung did confirm the Samsung Galaxy Ring's sleep apnea detection functionality was getting a coveted FDA certification — a significant badge of quality — very little else was said about the Ring, or its next generation.

While the silence has led some to believe that the Ring might be a one-and-done device, people are still passionate about the smart ring form factor. After all, the Oura Ring 5 was released this year, so I thought Samsung would be looking to follow up its smash-hit Galaxy Ring with a Galaxy Ring 2.

While it didn't appear in this year's presentation, it seems that a successor is, indeed, on the way. During an interview with Samsung's VP of Product and Marketing for Mobile Experience, Annika Bizon, I asked if there was any word on a potential Galaxy Ring 2.

"I will say yes, we are looking at the future of Ring, watch this space," Bizon told me. "It will definitely form part of our future portfolio of wearables."

I noted that Bizon was wearing a Samsung Galaxy Ring as we were speaking. "Well, I love it because it's discreet health," she said. "It tells me some of the things I need to know and when I put my watch back on, they'll work together."

There was definitely a "yes" in there, and the remark about the future portfolio suggests a new device, as well as a follow-up to the existing one, could be in the works. And the Galaxy Ring has certainly got fans inside Samsung's executive team.

Besides, Samsung aggressively pursuing certifications for the first-generation Ring shows it remains committed to investing time and money into its smallest wearable form factor. The short segment at Unpacked felt like a reminder that yes, the Ring exists, and there's more on the way.

Even though it's a mere tidbit compared to all the big news we got at the event, this is exciting stuff for fans of the best smart rings. The recent announcement of the blood-pressure monitoring startup Signal Ring from ex-Head of Android Tom Moss shows that tech companies are still pushing the limits of what smart rings can do.

Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2: One minute review

The Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 might look much the same as last year’s Galaxy Watch Ultra, but it feels very different to wear thanks to Samsung’s efficiency savings. A 12% slimmer titanium body and a lighter band (that remains the same size) mean the watch weighs less as an overall package and has better lockdown onto your wrist, so it doesn’t move around as much during strenuous exercise.

It’s got a new chipset under the hood: the AI-capable Qualcomm Snapdragon Wear Elite, which, Samsung says, offers 32% faster CPU and 19% faster GPU performance compared to last year’s model. It’s launching with three new bands, new wellness features like Vital and Heart Health, and all the usual smartwatch goodies like notifications, call accept/reject, digital wallet and third-party app support. The Ultra comes with LTE capabilities as standard to add the watch to your phone’s data plan, and new fitness tools tailor-made for adventurers, including trail running features with GPX routes, a Daily Cardio Load metric, mid-activity hydration alerts, professional-level diving certifications and — soon — a dedicated diving app.

Fortunately for them (but perhaps unfortunately for Samsung) adventurers find themselves spoiled for choice these days between the Apple Watch Ultra 3, the best Garmin watches, and challengers from brands such as Coros, Polar and Amazfit. The Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 may be good in a vacuum, with excellent health and fitness features, but it’s fighting for space amid a crowd of exceptional wearables. Ultimately, it’s the best Galaxy Watch ever from a specs perspective, and does everything you expect a smartwatch to do (and several things you might not expect); but it’s also expensive, big and bulky. I do wonder how many Samsung users will opt for this over either the much cheaper Galaxy Watch9 or, at the other end of the scale, a chunky specialist tool such as the Garmin Fenix 8 if they’re really interested in wilderness exploration.

It’s fast, it’s accurate (albeit with some niggles — see the Performance section below for more details), it’s got the brightest screen of any smartwatch, on-device Gemini capabilities, and is packed with enough features to make any smartwatch aficionado happy. It’s a terrific gadget, and if you’re a Samsung user who wants the best native watch for your phone’s ecosystem, this is it. But if you’re buying it for trails and routes, Garmin does this better, and with far better battery endurance, albeit with a less robust AI-powered interface for all your communication features.

Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2: Specifications

Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2: Price and availability

• $699.99 in the US
• £649 in the UK
• AU$1,299 in Australia

The Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 is priced at $699.99 / £649 / AU$1,299. This is actually a small increase of $50 / £50 in the US and UK over the launch price of the original Watch Ultra (but it's the same in Australia), likely due to the escalating price of electronics components.

While it’s still relatively competitively priced compared to the Apple Watch Ultra 3 and premium Garmins such as the Garmin Forerunner 970, it’s certainly on the higher end of the smartwatch price scale; but then again, this is a higher-end smartwatch.

• Value score: 4/5

Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2: Design

• 12% slimmer, but still quite bulky
• Titanium squircle cushion
• Strap is 25% lighter

The Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 iterates on the titanium squircle case design we first saw on the original Ultra, which Samsung calls a ‘cushion’, and which has since become a staple of the entire Galaxy Watch range. Housed within this body is the circular display, which is, according to Samsung…

The cushion incorporates new innards, including a larger 800mAh battery and a new Snapdragon Wear Elite processor. Despite the upgrades, the chassis is actually 12% slimmer than the original Watch Ultra’s, which is really a blessing, as that watch was a real beast. The cushion shape looks bulbous, but while it’s still a big watch that’s unsuitable for small wrists, it’s now better suited to a slightly wider variety of wrists than 2024’s enormous cuboid.

Couple this with the bands being 25% lighter this year, and the Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 has had a serious size and weight reduction, which makes it much better for staying locked on your wrist during strenuous exercise, where the previous model was prone to moving around.

The Ultra 2 has the Samsung Galaxy Watch series’ standard pair of side buttons, plus the programmable ‘Quick Button’ that only the premium watches get. This is set to opening ‘my exercises’ as standard, while a long press can activate the watch’s emergency siren, but you can assign a different function to this button to suit your needs. If you’ve used a Samsung watch before, the UI (One Watch UI, to be exact, based on Google’s Wear OS) is virtually unchanged, and for beginners it’s easy and intuitive to use.

The redesigned, AI-forward Samsung Health app is simple to use too, and even though much was made of its big makeover, it’s a far cry from Google Health’s chatbot-focused premium tier.

• Design score: 4.5/5

Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2: Features

• All the smartwatch features you’d expect
• Parcel of new health metrics: Vitals, Vascular Load & more
• Diving and trail-running features

The Ultra 2 offers all the usual smartwatch features you’d expect from an LTE-enabled watch, so I won’t list them all here, but suffice to say you can use virtual wallets, accept calls, message, control or store music, use the screen as a viewfinder for a Samsung phone’s camera, and even use Google Gemini via the new, easier Raise-to-Talk feature. Gemini works across devices, so you can make a quick voice note in the moment, and have it transcribed and saved to Samsung Notes or Google Keep, to be viewed later on your phone, tablet or laptop.

Samsung watches have always had strong health credentials, and the Ultra 2 is no different. It retains more esoteric features like blood-pressure monitoring (which requires an inflatable cuff for regular calibration, then uses your biometrics to predict fluctuations) and body composition (which uses electrical signals to estimate your fat and muscle mass) alongside the usual heart rate monitoring, sleep tracking, ECG scan functionality (which is medically certified, according to Samsung) and more. Running Coach, introduced last year, also makes a welcome return, along with its advanced analytics for runners.

New health features include Vitals, which looks at readings of five different heart-related metrics while you sleep and lets you know of any baseline deviations, a Daily Cardio Load score that estimates how much stress your exercise routine is putting your heart under, and Vascular Load, which measures stress and arterial stiffness.

Finally, new features have been added in the shape of two adventure-themed activity profiles. The watch is now a working dive computer — or will be when its companion app is released later this year in partnership with diving company Mares. The Apple Watch Ultra has a similar app, so I’m sure Samsung has been working overtime to catch up.

The Trail Running profile now includes the ability to save GPX routes into the workout activity itself, so you can follow turn-by-turn directions and see maps on your watch with a swipe of your finger. You can download routes yourself, or you have the option to save previous outdoor runs as a route to test yourself against later on, if you want to try to beat your own personal best. What you can’t do is create your own routes in-app, as you can in Garmin Connect for example.

• Features score: 4.5/5

Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2: Performance

• Heart rate had some drift compared to Apple Watch Ultra 3 and Polar H10, but tightened up after 10-15 minutes of wear
• Watch is more comfortable to wear than its predecessor
• Accurate sleep tracking

I wore the Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 for five days and four nights before writing this review, and I'll update it when I’ve logged enough nights sleep for features like Vitals to calibrate with seven-day averages. I was dreading wearing the Ultra 2 to bed given its bulkiness and size, but the slimmer, lighter Watch Ultra 2 was surprisingly comfortable for all-day wear — although I’m a man of fairly average build, and those with slimmer wrists may still find it uncomfortable.

Battery life was as described, with the Ultra 2 lasting the as-described 60 hours with always-on display enabled before needing a charge. Sleep was estimated accurately, with the watch and app correctly identifying my wake-up times during the night, and generating numbers corresponding with my energy levels.

To test GPS and heart rate accuracy, I went on a 30-minute run with the Watch Ultra 2 on one wrist, the Apple Watch Ultra 3 on the other, and a Polar H10 electrical heart-rate monitor (the gold standard for wearable heart-rate accuracy) strapped to my chest.

I was initially quite surprised at the difference in heart-rate readings the Watch Ultra 2 recorded at the start of the workout compared to the other two devices, with the Samsung watch sometimes reading 20 beats per minute lower than the Apple and Polar devices. However, after 15 minutes of exercise, I found that the Ultra 2’s readings were closely matching those of the other devices, as you can see from the corresponding graphs and readings below / above.

Initial heart rate ‘drift’ is a known problem with many optical heart-rate sensors (used by all smartwatches) in comparison to electrical ones, although Apple seems to have ironed out much of the problem with its Ultra 3. Still, even if the Samsung Ultra 2 does show some deviation at the beginning of a workout, if you’re exercising for any length of time your results are likely to be broadly accurate. I repeated this test during an indoor HIIT workout, and the results were the same: accurate after a brief warm-up period.

I also tested Body Composition, which uses the same method as the best smart scales — an electrical pulse moving through fat, muscle and water at a variety of speeds. I tested this against an industrial scale at my local gym after my run, and the ticket the scale produced showed that I was at 19% body fat. The smartwatch estimated 9%, a huge difference. It wasn’t until I did the test again later that day, after hydrating and adjusting my technique by raising my arms, that the watch showed 16% — a much closer result, and within the range of deviation I’d expect from two different devices.

I also tested the Ultra 2’s water lock feature by dunking it in a glass of water — after all, I’ve been burned before by so-say dive-ready watches — and it worked just fine afterwards.

• Performance score: 4/5

Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2: Scorecard

Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2: Should I buy?

Buy it if…

You’re a runner

The Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 is awash with terrific running features, and now trail runners are well catered for too.

You’re a Samsung phone user

Unsurprisingly, the Watch Ultra 2 works perfectly within the wider Samsung ecosystem.

You’re a Gemini user

Use AI for everything? Samsung’s Raise-to-Talk functionality and true on-watch Gemini makes using the smart assistant a doddle.

Don’t buy it if…

You need ultimate battery life

If you prioritize battery life and fitness features over connectivity, consider a Garmin or Coros watch.

You’re a casual exerciser and gym-goer

The Samsung Galaxy Watch9 is a much better-value fitness tracker for those who won’t use all the extra adventuring, diving, and safety features.

You’re an Apple user

The Watch Ultra 2 doesn’t work with Apple phones.

Also Consider…

How I tested

I wore the Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra 2 for the better part of a week, running the battery down and using it as my daily driver to accept and reject calls, check notifications and messages, use Gemini and control music. I tested it against devices such as the Apple Watch Ultra 3, the Polar H10 electrical heart rate monitor, and an industrial smart scale, and I dropped it into a glass of water to test its water lock feature.

First reviewed: July 2026

• Garmin Cirqa smart band has finally dropped
• The screen-free smart band costs $199.99 / £179.99 / AU$299.99
• I tested its accuracy and found it to be very good

It’s here! After months of leaks, the Garmin Cirqa smart band (styled ‘CIRQA’ by Garmin) has finally arrived. I got a chance to check it out — and wear it for a workout — at the official launch event. A sleek-looking fabric smart band in four colors (French Grey, Black, Captain Blue and Mauve) wrapped around a plastic puck, there’s no denying it looks a lot like a Whoop, Polar Loop or a thicker version of the Google Fitbit Air.

The puck packs an Elevate V4 heart rate sensor, the same one used on some of the best Garmin watches. The more powerful Elevate V5 was apparently too big for the size of the unit, according to Garmin.

The tracker offers some of Garmin’s best features including Health Status (Garmin's feature that monitors your vitals overnight), Body Battery, Training Readiness, pulse ox, women’s health tracking, and stress tracking and lots more. The Garmin Cirqa has a 10-day battery life, and the same proprietary charging port as the brand's watches. As expected, there's no onboard GPS, but it can piggyback off your phone's GPS.

Size-wise, it's slimmer than the Whoop MG but thicker than the Fitbit Air.

Many other screenless trackers have no buttons at all, but here Garmin has stuck with its tradition of creating smartwatches with tactile buttons, and added a button to the plastic chassis.

You can press this button to start and stop a workout, but you can also rely on automatic activity tracking for this. Garmin states this will improve the longer you wear the band, and it's also possible to edit workouts in the Connect app to ensure the right movements are correctly interpreted. For example, if you run a lot, the Garmin Cirqa will interpret the swinging of your arms and acceleration as a running workout and start one automatically.

Watch our hands-on below:

No subscription... or is there?

The band is subscription-free at its base price. Many screen-free trackers from the likes of Whoop and Oura rely entirely on subscriptions, but there is an element of monthly payment creeping in there. You can access Garmin Coach to get personalized training plans, but only if you subscribe to Garmin’s premium Garmin Connect+ tier.

This is the first time Garmin Coach has been locked behind the Garmin Connect+ paywall — previously, it either came with a watch or it didn’t.

Chrissy Wheeler, Garmin’s EMEA Senior Product Manager for Fitness, was at the launch and spoke about the Cirqa. She said: “You do have the option for premium content under Garmin Connect+. There are additional features, if you want to, you can pay for those, like all of our coaching side of things with this device. For some of our higher-end devices, these come included, but because this doesn’t have a screen, you need Garmin Connect+ to access the coaching size, our nutrition app… as well as Active Intelligence and AI insights.

“The key thing is that disconnect. People wanting to disconnect from phones, electronics on a day-to-day basis, but still want those metrics. It’s ideal, firstly, for people getting into fitness for the first time, but also for a lot of our athletes. Cycling, for example. They might record all their workouts on an Edge [Garmin cycling computer], but they’re missing out on that 24/7 recovery information, Body Battery, that goes alongside it.”

How I tested

After the product presentation, we were taken through a short HIIT workout by a trainer at the venue, for which I opted to wear the Polar H10 heart rate monitor. The Polar H10 is an electrical heart rate monitor worn on the chest, rather than an LED-based heart rate monitor worn on the wrist like the Cirqa.

It’s the gold standard for heart rate accuracy, used by many athletes all across the world. As fitness trackers use heart rate as the basis for almost all their metrics, it’s the perfect device to use as an accuracy benchmark.

During my workout, the Polar H10 recorded an average heart rate of 155 beats per minute, or bpm. The Garmin Cirqa recorded an average heart rate of 153 bpm, just 2bpm shy of the other device and well within the statistical margin for error. Graphs also aligned very closely.

Based on this first early test, I’m satisfied with the Garmin’s accuracy, but of course more testing will be required. Stay tuned.

• The Garmin Cirqa is a rumored screenless smart band, like a Whoop or Google Fitbit Air
• It's been the subject of a few unofficial leaks, and has been posted on Garmin's site in error before
• Another recent now-deleted post on Garmin's Romanian website has added fuel to the rumors

The Garmin Cirqa smart band is all but confirmed at this point. For months now, we've seen leak after leak about Garmin's Cirqa fitness tracker, and while we don't know too many details, it's seemingly a screenless smart band designed to compete with the likes of Whoop and the Google Fitbit Air.

Now it's reportedly leaked yet again. As spotted by Gadgets and Wearables, a recent update to Garmin's Romanian website, on the page explaining a feature called Health Status, mentions the Garmin Cirqa smart band (styled 'CIRQA') as a compatible device.

Health Status is a feature that combines five core metrics — heart rate, heart rate variability, respiration, skin temperature and pulse ox — to give an overview of your general health. It's a feature on most of the best Garmin watches now, so it's unsurprising that the Cirqa would be getting it.

The reference to Cirqa was reportedly swiftly deleted, but not before a screenshot was captured.

In January, Garmin posted the Cirqa on its own website, including color options (black and French Gray), before swiftly deleting it. It seems this has happened again. Add in other recent leaks, and you can see why it's basically confirmed at this stage.

The screenless 'focus wearables' category is having a moment. We've already seen the launches of the Oura Ring 5, Whoop competitors such as the Polar Loop (as seen in the image above, alongside the Whoop MG and Amazfit Helio Strap), and most recently the Google Fitbit Air. It makes sense that Garmin, one of the leading names in fitness tracking, wants in on the action while the category is still on the up.

I don't think a launch can be far away at this point, and I'll be keeping my ear to the ground for more Cirqa news as it breaks.

• The Garmin Cirqa, Garmin's long-rumored screenless smart band, is breaking cover
• Trademark filings have been spotted with governing bodies for the US, Canada, and EU, suggesting an imminent launch
• Google launched its screenless band with a redesigned, AI-powered app — but I hope Garmin doesn't follow suit

Garmin's long-rumored screenless smart band, designed to compete with the rising trend of 'focus wearables' such as the Google Fitbit Air and Whoop bands, is on the way. We initially thought it was the Garmin Index Sleep Monitor (pictured above), but that turned out to be a different product entirely.

The screenless fitness band is instead likely to be named the Garmin Cirqa, according to leaks; it's going to be a cool new deviation from Garmin's existing fitness watches list, and we now have more evidence that it's going to be launching soon.

Garmin has been filing trademarks for the name 'CIRQA' (styled in all caps, but we'll refer to it as Cirqa in text the same way we do Whoop, which is styled on its official branding as 'WHOOP'), with an entry to the US Patent and Trademark Office database spotted earlier this year.

However, Gadgets & Wearables have also found trademark filings for relevant governing bodies in Canada and the EU, adding fuel to the rumors that a launch may be imminent.

All the filings connote a body-worn sensor rather than a communication device, suggesting the Cirqa isn't just a new smartwatch: it's exclusively for health and fitness.

This is quite exciting: at the moment, people looking for screenless, discreet wearables have no shortage of options, from the Oura Ring 5 to the Fitbit Air to last year's Polar Loop strap. Clearly, the category and people's interest are growing, and a top-quality device from Garmin would sell like hot cakes.

However, I hope Garmin doesn't repeat one aspect of Google's Fitbit Air launch. At the same time as the Fitbit Air came out, Google transformed the Fitbit app into Google Health, eliminating the last of its community features like shareable badges and challenges, controversially redesigning the app, and turning the Premium tier into an AI 'Health Coach' chatbot.

Garmin's user base would revolt if such dramatic changes came to the Garmin Connect app. There was widespread outrage last year when Garmin introduced a Premium tier with AI-powered features — the community is a passionate and outspoken one that loves its technology, and any hint that features are being scrapped or the app transforming to better conform to the AI-first nature of most screenless trackers would be met with an enormous outcry.

Garmin will have to make its Cirqa band work within its existing watch-focused ecosystem, unless it wants to launch a separate app or risk losing some frustrated customers.

Samsung has officially confirmed that the Galaxy Ring 2 is in development. Dr. Hon Pak, Senior Vice President and Head of Samsung’s Digital Health Team, recently told Forbes that the company is “working on the next generation” of its smart ring.

Beyond confirming that a successor ring is on the way, Pak offered only a few hints about what we might expect. But the smart ring market looks different than it did when the original Galaxy Ring launched in 2024.

Competition is growing rapidly, with new smart rings appearing almost every month. While many still struggle to match the devices in our best smart rings guide, the bar has been raised considerably. The original Samsung Galaxy Ring remains our top overall pick, while the newly launched Oura Ring 5 is one of its strongest rivals.

I’ve tested many of the latest smart rings, and if Samsung wants its next ring to remain at the top, these are the upgrades I’d most like to see.

1. Resist the temptation to add a subscription

Even though interest in smart rings has surged over the past few years, I think we can still say they’re a relatively niche category. And I think one of the biggest barriers to entry is the ongoing subscription fee some brands charge.

For example, Oura requires a monthly membership of $5.99/£5.99 per month to unlock its full experience, and subscriptions — optional or otherwise — are on the up with fitness apps. Meanwhile, rivals like Ringconn have built some of their appeal around offering a similar health tracking experience without that additional fee.

Samsung certainly got this right with the original Galaxy Ring. And there are currently no signs a subscription is coming. But maintaining that approach feels increasingly important. We’ve already seen some companies introduce subscription-free products only to later place some features behind a paywall.

If Samsung wants to keep the Galaxy Ring truly competitive, it must make core health insights available without a monthly fee.

2. A slimmer and lighter design

Designing a smart ring has always been a challenge. Manufacturers need to pack in sensors, batteries and processing power all while making the ring feel as comfortable and jewellery-like as possible.

That’s one reason the new Oura Ring 5 has generated so much attention. It’s managed to become smaller and lighter while still adding some new capabilities.

Now, the Galaxy Ring 2 doesn’t necessarily need to be the smallest ring on the market. But even a slight reduction in size and weight would demonstrate that Samsung understands just how important comfort is when you’re asking people to wear something 24 hours a day.

3. Better battery life

Battery life is such an important part of the smart ring experience. The more I take off a ring, the less likely wearing it everyday will become a habit. And the more likely I become to forget about it. It also makes monitoring for trends and average vitals more tricky and less accurate.

As I write this, I’m testing the RingConn Gen 3, which promises significantly longer battery life than many of its rivals at 12 days on average. Other manufacturers are also exploring new battery technologies and the Samsung Galaxy Ring 2 is rumored to be getting a powerful solid-state battery upgrade

The original Galaxy Ring already offers a good battery life, but expectations are rising fast. And again, Samsung doesn’t necessary need to beat every rival. But if competing rings continue pushing to longer runtimes, the Ring 2 will need to remain competitive.

4. iOS support

I think we can safely say this one feels less like something I’d like to see in the next generation of Samsung Galaxy Ring and more like something that must be a necessity.

The Samsung Galaxy Ring was only for Android users. Now, reports already suggest Samsung is working towards iPhone compatibility. If that’s true it could dramatically increase the Galaxy Ring’s appeal.

Because at the moment, limiting the ring to Samsung’s ecosystem excludes loads of potential buyers. Sure, Samsung users will continue to benefit from deeper integrated and additional features. But core functionality across both Android and iOS feels like a necessity.

However, we know Apple's already filed a patent for ring technology — see the above diagram — so even if it never comes to fruition, it's certainly a form factor Apple is mulling over.

5. Add a compelling new health feature

Most smart rings track the same core metrics, like sleep, heart rate, activity, stress and recovery. That means Samsung may need to offer something genuinely distinctive to stand out.

I say that because I’ve been testing the RingConn Gen 3 over the past few weeks, which adds features like vascular health insights and sleep apnea monitoring. Now, whether those features prove valuable to most users over the long term remains to be seen. But, they give the ring a clear point of differentiation.

I don’t think Samsung needs to copy those exact features. But offering something beyond the standard collection of health metrics could help the Galaxy Ring 2 feel like a meaningful upgrade over the original and a solid choice in a sea of similar offerings.

6. AI that isn’t annoying

I’m generally sceptical about AI chatbots in wearables because most implementations I’ve tested simply repeat the same information that’s visible in the app or provide really generic recommendations.

That said, some of Pak’s comments to Forbes do suggest Samsung is thinking beyond a basic execution of AI. Explaining that people have different motivational styles, so the approach needs to be tailored accordingly: “Over the next two to three years, the AI will be able to say, based on this person's characteristics, I'm going to nudge them this way, and 70 or 80 per cent of the time I can predict that person is going to exercise more or sleep more.”

I’m still cautious, especially as Samsung has already added some AI features to Samsung Health. But many wearable brands underestimate how much language matters when it comes to behavior change. The best implementation isn’t just telling users to sleep more, it might identify useful patterns, changes or spot warning signs and deliver advice in a way that’s genuinely personalized.

If Samsung can achieve that, AI could become one of the Galaxy Ring 2’s most compelling features rather than another box-ticking exercise.

There’s a good chance we’ll learn more at Samsung’s next Galaxy Unpacked event, which is scheduled to take place in London on July 22, 2026.

Garmin Forerunner 170: One minute review

The Garmin Forerunner 170 and 170 Music sit nicely between the cheaper Garmin Forerunner 70 and more expensive 570 and 970 duo, the latter of which features on our best Garmin watches guide. As such, both Music and non-Music versions are a bit of a halfway house; not quite cheap enough to be picked up on a whim by budget-conscious consumers, nor expensive enough to be stuffed with top-quality premium features.

However, it is stuffed with plenty of robust fitness features that will suit any active exerciser, especially runners. Sebastian Sawe, who who broke the world record by running a marathon under two hours in London, was toting a Garmin Forerunner 55 — Garmin’s cheapest, most stripped-back running watch.

What you’re paying for here is the Garmin Forerunner 70 — an excellent smartwatch on the cheaper end, and the successor to the popular Garmin Forerunner 55 — with additional smartwatch features attached. These include Garmin Pay, a virtual wallet which lets you pay with cards held on-watch, and the Smart Notifications feature, which allows you to view and manage alerts from a paired smartphone. The Forerunner 170 Music adds an extra 4GB of music storage.

If you’re largely uninterested in these features and you just want an excellent training tool, I’d get the Garmin Forerunner 70 instead, as it’s the best value of the three newcomers overall. But the Garmin Forerunner 170 Music does allow you to hit that Saturday morning parkrun, pay for your coffee, and jog home with headphones in — all without using your phone at all. It’s incredibly convenient, but not a package everyone will need or want.

Still, during my testing I found the watch good to use, comfortable to sleep in, and accurate against testing units like my Polar H10 heart rate monitor. Our writer Michael Sawh found the same with the Garmin Forerunner 70. You can read my full thoughts on the 170 Music below, but whichever watch you choose, you’ll be in good hands.

Garmin Forerunner 170 review: Specifications

Garmin Forerunner 170 review: Price and availability

• Garmin Forerunner 170: $299 / £259.99 / AU$479
• Garmin Forerunner 170 Music: $349.99 / £299.99 / AU$549
• Garmin Forerunner 70: $249.99 / £219.99 / AU$399

The Garmin Forerunner 170 without music storage costs $299 / £259.99 / AU$479.

The Garmin Forerunner 170 Music, the upgrade with 4GB internal memory for music storage, costs $349.99 / £299.99 / AU$549. The Forerunner 70, which doesn’t have the 170’s smartwatch features such as Garmin Pay and Smart Notifications, is cheaper at $249.99 / £219.99 / AU$399.

We’re zeroing in on the Garmin Forerunner 170 today, and I think the watch is generally good value for money compared to some of the seriously expensive premium Garmins in the lineup, but perhaps not compared to the 70, which is $100 / £80 / AU$150 cheaper for a very similar watch. If you don’t want Garmin Pay or notifications, you’re better off saving your cash and getting the 70.

None of the Garmins have a particularly wide feature set compared to watches from Apple and Samsung at a similar price point, but their batteries last far longer — up to 10 days for the 170 — and their workout credentials are fantastic. This ensures you can get multiple battery-sucking GPS workouts in each week while still retaining enough smartwatch functionality to matter, all without needing a charge for ages. Each Garmin watch is durable too.

I’d say it’s generally a good value prospect, even if it does edge into the expensive end with the 170 Music.

• Score: 4/5

Garmin Forerunner 170 review: Design

• Iterates on existing Forerunner design
• Surprisingly dull AMOLED screen
• Elevate V4 heart rate sensor

The Garmin Forerunner 170 looks very much like every other Forerunner, but if this is your first Garmin that won’t mean much. It’s got a five-button configuration — up, down, light, start, stop or select, and back (or lap). You can use these, a touchscreen, or a combination of the two to navigate the watch, which is ideal if you’re wearing gloves.

It comes in a single size, with a 42.6mm screen, and its packing an AMOLED display rather than the duller digital-watch-style memory-in-pixel screen of older watches, but it’s not particularly bright even at full power. It comes with a silicon two-tone strap, and on the back it has one of Garmin’s older heart rate sensors, the Elevate V4. More expensive watches get the more accurate V5, but the V4 has been included here presumably to keep the cost down.

It’s very light, with a listed weight of 41g, and feels like less than that in the hand. A light watch is great for running and collecting wellness info as it’s easy to wear, and this checks the boxes.

Those familiar with Garmin products will be happy to know no liberties have been taken with the design of Garmin’s established software, either on-watch or in the Garmin Connect app. I think it’s the perfect mix of stripped-down and information-heavy, although there are a lot of menus to lose yourself in. The buttons make it fairly intuitive to navigate around for old hands. It’s a tried and tested design, that doesn’t break the mold in any significant way.

• Design score: 4/5

Garmin Forerunner 170 review: Features

• Advanced running dynamics
• Limited smart notifications functionality
• 170 Music offers mp3 and streaming downloads

Plenty of running features abound here. As the name suggests, Garmin’s included its advanced running dynamics tools such as running power (a measure of your total running effort using motion data as well as heart rate), along with advanced statistics such as stride and cadence data after your run. During workouts, you can set up routes in Garmin Connect with virtual pacers to keep you on time.

You also get the usual health stuff, such as heart rate and sleep score, 80 workout modes (although not all have dedicated metrics or GPS enabled) and reports in the morning and evening that provide information about your training along with the weather and a motivational quote. The Garmin Forerunner 170 gets Smart Notifications, which allow you to answer some tests with simple replies and the Garmin Pay functionality which acts as a virtual wallet like Apple Pay.

The 170 Music’s 4GB of storage allows you to upload tunes directly onto the watch, including by saving playlists from the likes of Spotify. Even without the dedicated Music model, you can listen on apps like Spotify, Deezer, YouTube Music and so on through your phone, and control music on the watch there. The Garmin Connect IQ store has dedicated widgets for these services, along with thousands of other apps from a mixture of big-name brands and enthusiastic amateurs.

Otherwise, what’s missing? I wasn’t expecting full-color maps at this price, just the breadcrumb navigation and route direction common on most Garmin watches without maps, so I don’t feel like the feature is missing, as such.

However, to justify the price increase from the 70 to the 170 Music, I think it needs more hardware features. A microphone like the Garmin Forerunner 570, and the ability to take calls on watch and use Garmin’s simple voice assistant, would better separate it. As is, most people who want dedicated smartwatch features will just get one of the best Apple Watches or best Samsung watches instead.

• Features score: 4/5

Garmin Forerunner 170 review: Performance

• Accurate against a heart rate monitor
• GPS works well against an Apple Watch Ultra 3
• Comfortable and easy to wear day-to-day

I checked the Garmin’s heart rate accuracy against an electrical chest-mounted Polar H10 heart rate monitor — the gold standard of heart rate accuracy — during a 25-minute treadmill test, and was very pleased to report that despite the older sensor, both average and maximum heart rate were within 1-4bpm of the heart rate monitor; a very acceptable margin for error and not a statistically significant one.

GPS was accurate compared to my Apple Watch Ultra 3, and battery life was representative of its claims, with total drain taking just over a week with multiple GPS workouts completed. I feel as though the ‘up to 10 days’ listed battery life is reflective of reality.

Being lighter and smaller than many Garmins I’ve tested, it’s comfortable to wear every day and fine to sleep in.

• Performance score: 4.5 / 5

Garmin Forerunner 170 review: Scorecard

Garmin Forerunner 170 review: Should I buy?

Buy it if...

Don't buy it if...

Also consider

How I tested

I wore the Garmin Forerunner 170 Music for over a week, draining the battery down and using as many of its features as possible. I ran and used it for strength and yoga sessions, tested its smart features, and pitted it against multiple competitor devices, including a chest strap heart rate monitor.

Amazfit Active 3 Premium: One minute review

Amazfit has been a company I’ve been keeping an eye on since their Bip 3 ‘budget’ smartwatch blew through all my expectations (and then some), followed by a slew of other watches across a range of price points, aiming to undercut the likes of Garmin — but most notably the $99 / £99 Amazfit Active 2, which earned five stars in our review. So when they put the word “Premium” on a product, it piques my curiosity.

Not only does the Amazfit Active 3 Premium have a bunch of excellent features that rival some of the biggest in the business, like excellent sleep and fitness tracking, but it’s also a fantastic-looking smartwatch.

The ‘Premium’ moniker signifies the addition of the super-tough sapphire glass coating, and the inclusion of the NFC payment feature. This was the distinction that the Amazfit Active 2 Premium used to separate itself from the base Active 2: however, there is no base Active 3, so even though this watch uses the ‘Premium’ model distinction, it’s the only watch in its range.

Despite this, it’s not an expensive buy. Sure, it’s pricier than the older Active 2, but it’s still undercutting the cheapest Apple and Garmin watches while delivering performance that belies its price. Another excellent example of a fitness tracker from Amazfit, a company which has by now shown itself to be a serious contender in the fitness tech space.

Amazfit Active 3 Premium: Specifications

Amazfit Active 3 Premium: Price and availability

• Starts at $169 / £169 / AU$239
• Not Amazfit’s cheapest, but still cheaper than many rivals
• Available in three color options

It’s hard not to look at the Amazfit Active 3 Premium and not feel as though there’s a catch somewhere when it comes to its price, but it really is a sub-$170 / £170 / AU$250 fitness watch with the kinds of features and accuracy you’d have spent double that for not long ago. Our review unit is the Atlas Blue model, but it’s also available in Apex Silver and Aero White.

• Value score: 5/5

Amazfit Active 3 Premium review: Design

• Heavier than some alternatives
• AMOLED display

Regardless of your color choice, the Amazfit Active 3 Premium is a looker. It has a circular body with a metallic finish, with the underside color-matched to the bands for Atlas Blue and Aero White (Apex Silver would be my pick, but the whole body is silver with a black strap).

The strap itself is the standard polymer-style you’ll have felt on just about any other smartwatch, but the fact that the Amazfit Active 3 Premium uses a pin system like a more traditional watch adds a touch of class (and some minor fiddliness). It’s got a 1.32-inch display, which isn’t large —but it’s the same size as the Amazfit Active 2. I didn’t feel like I was losing much in terms of screen space compared to some of Amazfit’s larger watches, but I was surprised to find it’s slightly heavier than the Coros Nomad I tested recently.

With that said, I’m not sure I’d consider it rugged. I wasn’t prepared to hurl my review unit to the ground to test its durability, despite its sapphire glass and scratch-resistant coating. It might not be the watch you’ll want to take on an ultramarathon, but it’ll stand up to runs, rides and gym workouts with ease.

• Design score: 4.5/5

Amazfit Active 3 Premium: Features

• Full-color maps
• HybridCharge is great
• 170 sports modes

Ok, so the Amazfit Active 3 Premium is a looker, but does it have the smarts to back it up? Despite the relatively low price, the answer is a resounding yes. You’ll need to use the Zepp app, and while I’ve tested it before and found it to be a little cumbersome, I am pleased to report that (at least in the time I’ve been away), it’s much slicker these days.

You can use it as a dashboard, and there are badges to collect that include step goals, monthly targets, and much more.

Fitbit Premium’s Daily Readiness Score has led the charge to distill a bunch of complex metrics into an easy-to-read number that calculates how hard you can push your workout on any given day, and Amazfit’s version is called “HybridCharge”.

It takes into account sleep, heart rate, activity, and recovery, as well as subjective inputs like stress, health, and more, to help you make a judgment on whether today is a workout day or a rest day, and it does so pretty well.

One day during testing, I’d struggled to sleep and had an early start at work, and the app and watch understood that maybe I needed to take it easy and recover that day. It’s something you used to need a premium subscription for with other manufacturers, but I’m glad to see it’s included in the price of the product here.

PAI is also back, so those looking for a quick look at a glance to see how their natural fitness is holding up can check it out by testing their heart rate zones. The watch supports basic notification features, and of course offers that NFC payment digital wallet feature for convenience. A barnstorming inclusion is full-color maps, offering turn-by-turn navigation. This is a premium feature crammed into a value package, offering turn-by-turn navigation during runs, rides and walks.

• Features score: 4.5/5

Amazfit Active 3 Premium: Performance

• AMOLED display
• 12 days of battery life
• Excellent accuracy

Performance is uniformly excellent across the board with the Amazfit Active 3 Premium. Fitness tracking offers a deep suite of metrics, including running ones like stride length, ground contact, and just about anything else you could possibly ask for as a runner. And, if you’re just learning what all of these measurements are, fear not: Everything is handily explained within the Zepp app.

When you’re done, the app also does a great job at showcasing your fatigue level, which then feeds into the aforementioned HybridCharge metrics.

I very rarely check my sleep outside of Apple’s Sleep Score number, but the Amazfit Active 3 Premium does make me want to dig deeper — and offers plenty of data to do so. I was surprised at how often I was getting up in the night without realising it, and the Aura section of the Zepp app even includes relaxing music to help you settle back down.

Battery-wise, Amazfit claims you can get 12 days from a single charge. In my experience, it’s been closer to 10 days, but it’s still very respectable given the amount of data it’s collecting day in, day out. The AMOLED display is plenty bright for just about everything, even direct sunlight.

The only minor gripe I have with the Amazfit Active 3 Premium is that it doesn’t automatically offer to track a workout if you start walking/running/doing anything. As someone who still forgets to hit the button before setting out, it’s nice when devices like the Apple Watch give a nudge.

• Performance Score: 4.5 / 5

Amazfit Active 3 Premium: Scorecard

Amazfit Active 3: Should I buy?

Buy it if...

Don't buy it if...

Also consider

How I tested the Amazfit Active 3 Premium

I’ve been testing the Amazfit Active 3 Premium while walking, hitting the gym for weights and cardio (primarily using the cross trainer), and wearing it for just about everything in life.

I tested the GPS across various areas of London and more remote areas like the countryside where I live, and wore it to bed, too. I tested many of its measurements by pairing it with my Apple Watch Series 11 on the opposite wrist.

• Ultrahuman hits Ring Pro production problems
• Kickstarter backers are left wondering when they'll get their ring
• August 10 is the new expected date but it's far from guaranteed

Ultrahuman is no stranger to producing some of the best smart rings, but not even that could protect them from the outpouring of disappointment and frustration that came its way after informing Ring Pro Kickstarter backers that shipments were being delayed yet again.

Customers took to Reddit to share their annoyance after u/enzolecorbeau started a thread by sharing a screenshot of the official Ultrahuman message. In it, Ultrahuman states that shipments were now "expected to begin from August 10 onwards".

Kickstarter backers were expecting to receive their orders in June, and this latest delay isn't the first. A single delay is one thing, but now it has happened several times, backers are starting to get vocal about the continued delays to the fitness tracker.

One Reddit user was annoyed that the unit had been sent to "influencers" and not to "people who paid money". Others report that they've requested cancelations but without success.

It's not all negative, though, with one Reddit user hoping the delay is down to the battery "because that would mean they may actually be looking to improve it."

Ultrahuman doesn't mention the battery but instead attributes the delays to issues experienced during the scaling of production. Ultrahuman says they are "taking extra care to ensure every Ring PRO meets the quality and experience standards we've set for it."

Their commitment to quality is no bad thing. They go on: "Each ring is individually crafted with a high level of precision and care – from the finishing to the final quality checks – and this process is taking slightly longer than originally anticipated."

Ultrahuman has always delivered before

Ultrahuman ran Kickstarter campaigns for both their Ring and Ring Air devices and faithfully fulfilled orders of both.

In reality, crowdfunded projects are often subject to delays. For Ultrahuman, the challenge of manufacturing a titanium unibody with a cutaway safety feature en masse is no doubt contributing to the delays — the last thing Ultrahuman will want is to ship a ring with issues, especially as smart ring problems can prove dangerous.

Customers are more likely to forgive the brand for a delayed shipment than they are for receiving a device with issues. A botched product release could damage customer trust and mean the end of the wearables brand.

None of this will appease the community of people who were expecting to receive their ring back in June and are still left waiting. Only time will tell when Ultrahuman will start fulfilling these orders.

After publishing the original article, Ultrahuman CEO, Mohit Kumar, replied with the following statement:

"The Ultrahuman Ring PRO pushes boundaries with a 15-day battery life and a titanium unibody with ProRelease, which lets the ring be cut apart safely if a finger ever swells. As with anything novel, scaling it has proven harder than anticipated. Production is running, but not yet fast enough; however, the path to full capacity is clear for 10 August.”

I’ve been writing about fitness tech for years, and we’re finally at a point where more affordable fitness trackers are now every bit as capable as models that would have cost hundreds of dollars or pounds, little more just a few years ago. That’s not to say premium options don’t have their place too, but many of the standouts this year have certainly been on the cheaper end.

Whether it’s screenless devices showing less can be more, the latest iteration of the popular Oura Ring, or a pair of Amazfit options that can cut it with much more expensive models, here are the best fitness trackers in 2026 so far, in no particular order.

1. Google Fitbit Air

• Release date: May 26
• Rating: 4/5

Whoop bands are growing in popularity for their distraction-free, sensor-packed, highly comfortable nature, and Google didn’t want to be outdone.

The tech giant’s answer to Whoop’s popularity, the Google Fitbit Air’s companion app boasts an effective but controversial AI-powered premium tier for additional insights, courtesy of Google’s new AI Health Coach. However, even on the free tier, this comfortable tracker weighing just 12 grams and reasonably priced at $99.99 / £84.99 / AU$199 is well worth a look.

Its real strength is heart rate metrics, which are consistently impressive for a cheap device, and it includes FDA-certified background AFib detection for additional peace of mind.

Our main gripe (outside of the two-tier app offering) is that it lacks GPS, and therefore run data feels less accurate than we’d have liked – even at this price.

Watch our YouTube review of the Google Fitbit Air here:

2. Oura Ring 5

• Release date: June 4
• Rating: 4/5

From the low-priced end of the spectrum to the expensive, the Oura Ring 5 is the latest offering from the company that, if they’re not the only game in town, more or less popularised the smart ring form factor.

Starting at $399 / £399 / AU$649, it’s hardly cheap, but it does a great job of offering a less intrusive way of tracking your wellness and fitness. In fact, despite its size, the fact that it could easily be mistaken for a piece of jewellery, and how comfortable it is, it’s remarkably accurate, too.

With a week of tracking between charges (including sleep), it offers more color options and better connectivity (Bluetooth 6.0 vs 5.4) at the same price as the Samsung Galaxy Ring. It’s also somehow 40% smaller than the last generation of Oura Ring, while still matching up with a dedicated chest strap for heart tracking.

Watch our YouTube review of the Oura Ring 5 here:

3. Amazfit Cheetah 2 Pro:

• Release date: April 16
• Rating: 4/5

When a company like Amazfit (one of the best budget tracker manufacturers) takes aim at the premium market, it’s wise to take notice. The Amazfit Cheetah 2 Pro offers a Garmin-like experience with a bunch of runner-focused tools like training plans and detailed metrics, all with marathon-tackling 31 hours of dual-band GPS tracking.

Using it day-to-day can get you 20 days of battery life, and while it is a fairly bulky watch on the wrist, it’s a much cheaper rival to Garmin offerings.

GPS tracking is solid, but offline maps could use some work. Still, if you’re a runner, this is one of the models to beat this year.

4. Amazfit Active 3 Premium

• Release date: February 26
• Rating: 5/5

Another Amazfit, sure, but if the Cheetah 2 Pro is too much for you, the Amazfit Active 3 Premium is well worth a look. Despite the name, it’s priced very reasonably at $169 / £169 / around AU$325), while still offering an AMOLED display, built-in GPS, and a fairly weighty (but comfortable) 54.6g chassis.

Battery life can run you for up to 12 days according to Amazfit (but I hit around 11 in testing), and the Zepp app has improved massively in recent years so it’s a very solid running companion with some bona fide coaching options.

You’ll likely want something a little more durable if you’re going off-trail, but what it lacks in ruggedness, the Amazfit Active 3 Premium makes up for by being a great-looking budget option.

5. Garmin Forerunner 70

• Release date: May 15
• Rating: 4/5

Reviewer Mike Sawh wasn’t kidding — the Garmin Forerunner 70 really might be better value than its more premium cousin, the Garmin Forerunner 170.

High praise indeed, but even without Garmin’s latest, more expensive sensors, it packs accurate metrics alongside an easy-to-read AMOLED display and physical buttons that make it easy to use, excellent sports tracking, and impressive training insights.

It does lose the affordability of the Garmin Forerunner 55, and doesn’t have smartwatch features like NFC payments, but for a runner it’s a great option that’s one of the year’s strongest.

• Samsung is phasing out the Vascular Load feature on Galaxy Watch in the US
• It's replacing it with Blood Pressure Trend in late July
• Users believe this is due to FDA compliance issues

Samsung's range of smartwatches covers every base when it comes to fitness tracking, but the tech giant is pulling the plug on a health monitoring tool it rolled out only last year. Don't fret; a replacement feature is on the way.

The company’s experimental Vascular Load feature, a tool that was introduced alongside the launch of the Galaxy Watch 8 at last year’s Galaxy Unpacked 2025, will be phased out in the US by late July. Its removal aligns with the upcoming Samsung Health 7.0 and One UI 9 watch updates, but it appears that Vascular Load will still be available to users outside of the US following the changes.

When Samsung removes Vascular Load at the end of the month, you'll no longer be able to access this data in the Samsung Health app. However, you can download your existing data by opening the app and tapping Samsung Health Settings, then find Samsung Health Information to continue.

Users are currently being notified via the Samsung Health app, but the company has yet to issue a wider announcement, which is a little frustrating, as I can imagine users just want a bit of clarity. That said, Samsung isn’t leaving you high and dry.

To make up for the loss of the Vascular Load monitoring tool, the company is offering an alternative: Blood Pressure Trend — which Samsung says will be available in the upcoming Galaxy Watch (we assume this is referring to the Galaxy Watch 9).

While Vascular Load uses your heart rate data to measure factors like changes in blood volume, Blood Pressure Trend is designed to monitor your blood pressure periodically and show you a trend over time. In addition to this, it will also offer you tips and tricks to help maintain healthy habits.

To get started with Blood Pressure Trend, Samsung highlights in the notification that you’ll need to use a blood pressure cuff with your Galaxy Watch, and then once every 28 days to maintain accuracy (according to Android Authority). The company also shared that Blood Pressure Trend “is for wellness only”, and “not for the diagnosis and treatment of any medical condition”.

It’s still early days, and Galaxy Watch owners are awaiting further information on the upcoming changes, which have sparked online debate regarding the reasons for its US removal.

A vast majority of the online commenters believe that Samsung is concerned about Food and Drug Administration (FDA) compliance — one user says that the FDA often drags out approvals like this. While this idea gives the removal credibility, Samsung has yet to detail the reasons for its decision to stop access to Vascular Load, so we have to take this speculation with a pinch of salt.

• SVP at Samsung says the Galaxy Ring 2 is officially in development
• It could come with a slew of design upgrades as well as deeper integration with other Samsung devices
• The biggest improvement is support for iOS, a first for Samsung wearables

When Samsung released the Galaxy Ring in 2024 it shot to the top of our list of best smart rings, but the Korean tech company has been rather silent on plans for the next-gen wearable — until now.

Speaking with Forbes, Senior Vice President and Head of the Digital Health Team at Samsung, Hon Pak, shared that the company’s next smart ring (presumably named the Galaxy Ring 2) is officially in development; “We are working on the next generation. I can tell you that,” he shared.

The announcement arrives just after the new Oura Ring 5 hit the shelves which, compared to its predecessor, is roughly 40% smaller with an even longer battery life, although does come with a higher price tag. It’s about time Samsung returned to the smart ring world given how fierce the competition has grown over the last two years — so how will the Galaxy Ring 2 stand against its rivals?

When Samsung released the first Galaxy Ring, Pak described it as “a comprehensive and simplified approach” to health and sleep, and it seems that he wants to build on this across both hardware and software.

For starters, if we look at the Oura Ring 5’s slimmer redesign, it wouldn’t come as a complete surprise if Samsung replicated a similar ‘smaller but tougher’ approach to its own smart ring for added comfort improvements.

Additionally, Samsung could take a page out of Oura’s book and remove skin contact bumps from the inside of the ring, all while extending its battery life — we also predicted that it will come with a solid state battery.

Though design upgrades are likely, Pak hinted that this won’t be the biggest difference with the Galaxy Ring 2. “If you look at the comparison of other rings, regardless of the competitor, the sensors are not that different right now,” he said, adding “It’s really about what services you create on the top layer. It’s really the software differentiation that you see.”

With these remarks in mind, the Galaxy Ring 2’s main focus will be on developing deeper software integration rather than reupholstering the hardware. Pak also shared that Samsung has plans to build on its connected ecosystem to help users receive more accurate metrics and get a better sense of their health habits.

Instead of using just the Galaxy Ring 2's collection of metrics to present the full picture of your well-being, Samsung takes your data from the smart ring and blends it with other devices in its network via the Samsung Health app. This could include Galaxy Watches and smartphones, and even its range of SmartThings home appliances to give you more detailed context into your daily activity and overall well-being.

For users who are deep into Samsung’s ecosystem of devices already, it’s a huge win, but one of the biggest setbacks with the first-gen Galaxy Ring is its lack of support for iOS. While Samsung has the overall edge over the likes of Oura, the latter supports iOS, giving users more reason to opt for its wearables over Samsung’s — but this could change with the Galaxy Ring 2.

In addition to software upgrades, Pak heavily teased that iOS support will finally be coming to the Galaxy Ring; “I’m smiling but I can’t say anything,” he hinted. Out of all the new upgrades, iOS support would throw the biggest curveball into the competition, giving non-Android users even more reason to make the switch to Galaxy Ring over rival wearables.

While it’s not exactly a formal announcement, it’s certainly a promising affirmation of what to expect from the long-awaited wearable. Despite not giving any details on an official launch date, Galaxy Unpacked 2026 is just around the corner where we’re expecting the announcement of the S26 lineup — could Samsung also throw the Galaxy Ring 2 into the mix?

• The Fitbit Air is getting its first software update
• It should fix problems with automatic workout detection
• An old Fitbit app workaround is going away

The first software update for the Fitbit Air is rolling out now, and the hope is that it's going to fix one particular bugbear for users — but there's also bad news for those who are still using the older Fitbit app rather than the Google Health replacement.

First up, the update is rolling out now, as reported by 9to5Google, though you might not see it right away: look for a notification inside the Google Health app that an update is ready. As per Google, it contains "bug fixes and general improvements".

There's a bit more detail in a post on the Google Health support forum from last month, suggesting that there are fixes to exercise tracking, split runs, exercise exports, multiple device support, and how the device deals with lost connectivity when tracking.

As noted by Android Authority, one of the most commonly reported problems on the Fitbit Air has been the inaccurate labeling of workouts that are detected automatically — tagging runs as general workouts, for example — and this issue now seems to have been resolved.

No more Fitbit app workarounds

While a software update is positive news for Fitbit Air owners, those who have been clinging on to the old Fitbit app on their phones won't be pleased that Google has now closed off a workaround for avoiding the upgrade to Google Health.

As explained by Gadgets & Wearables, some users have been sideloading older versions of the Fitbit app: these older versions don't get automatically replaced by Google Health, so it's a way of sticking with the old app interface and layout.

From July 15 though, these older versions of the Fitbit app are going to stop working. Users will have no choice but to switch to Google Health, which moves around a lot of the key elements on screen and introduces a new AI coach.

Fitbit fans have been complaining loudly about the changes that the Google Health app brings with it, and many are unhappy about being forced to upgrade: "I think I'm going to have to find an alternative to the AI slop," writes one Redditor.

• Real-life experiment shows bug spray can kill Fitbit Airs
• It's to do with the chemicals inside the repellent
• Spray carefully, as you won't be covered under warranty

Here at TechRadar we've been rather impressed by what the Fitbit Air has to offer, but one unfortunate user has found out the hard way that you shouldn't use bug spray when the fitness tracker is wrapped around your wrist.

The problematic incident was recorded on Reddit (via Phandroid), and it seems that a thorough and protective application of bug spray has eaten into the plastic component of the Fitbit Air, stopping it from functioning.

"Went on a hike this weekend with my Fitbit Air," reads the original Reddit post. "I've had it for 14 days now, and I found out that bug spray will destroy it. I had put some on the cuffs of my hiking shirt and it transferred over to the device and broke down the plastic."

To make matters worse, the user reports that the same fate befell his wife's Fitbit too (though it's not clear if that's also a Fitbit Air). The original post ends with a recommendation to "save your cash for something built better".

Little sympathy

The Reddit detectives went straight to work, determining that it was likely the chemical DEET (N,N-diethyl-meta-toluamide) causing the problem. It's widely used in insect repellents, and is pretty harsh on plastics as well as bugs.

And sympathy seems to be in short supply on the Reddit thread. "The documentation very clearly states that it shouldn't come in contact with sunscreens and bug sprays," writes one poster, while another says: "This is on you buddy."

Google isn't being particularly sympathetic either, telling the affected user that the damage counts as environmental or accidental damage, and so isn't covered under the warranty. No replacement Fitbit Air will be forthcoming in this case.

There have been other stories like this in recent days, so it seems a substantial number of people aren't aware about the damage that insect repellent can do. As ever, always read the small print — on both your fitness trackers and your bug sprays.

It's a tale as old as tech time: a new flagship device appears on the scene, which means the device it's replacing gets a price drop, and potentially offers better value for money for the discerning gadget buyer.

For this guide, we're going to be looking specifically at the Oura Ring 4 (which launched in 2024) and the Oura Ring 5 (launched in 2026). The Oura Ring 4 is likely to see some great Amazon Prime Day deals, but should you go all in on the latest and most expensive model? Or is the older model the better investment when bought at a discount?

• Browse the full Amazon Prime Day sale

There's no doubt that both models qualify as two of the best smart rings on the market right now, but which one is right for you depends on your budget and what your priorities are. Here's how they compare.

Oura Ring 5 vs Oura Ring 4: pricing

While pricing varies as special offers come and go, the Oura Ring 5 launched for a starting price of $399 / £399 / AU$649, with some finishes costing extra at $499 / £499 / AU$799 – that's a little more expensive than the original Oura Ring 4 (note that the prices for Australia are for third-party resellers, not from Oura directly).

There's an upgraded charging case available for $99 / £99 / AU$159 for the Oura Ring 5, and then there's the monthly subscription: $5.99 / £5.99 / AU$9.99 a month or $69.99 / £69.99 / AU$109.99 a year. While a subscription isn't technically necessary to use an Oura Ring, you do need one to access the bulk of its features.

So what about Oura Ring 4 price drops? At the time of writing, the starting price is $349 / £349 if you go through the official channels, and we're seeing some good deals on the Oura Ring 4 already, which you can find below. Given that it's an older model, you're much more likely to see discounts on this smart ring on both the Oura shop and third-party retailers like Amazon.

Oura Ring 5 vs Oura Ring 4: specs and features

What you need to know first is that the Oura Ring 5 is notably slimmer than the Oura Ring 4: for the most affordable finishes, it's 6.09 mm (0.24 inches) wide and 2.28 mm (0.09 inches) thick, down from 7.9 mm (0.31 inches) and 2.8 mm (0.11 inches), which is a reduction of about 40%.

That can make a difference when it comes to comfort and day-to-day wear. The new model is lighter too, with those reduced dimensions, weighing 2 grams rather than 3.3 grams. Both models are available in a variety of ring sizes to fit your finger, though the Oura Ring 5 introduces a new sizing scheme that doesn't match its predecessor.

The Oura Ring 5 is also more scratch resistant, while both models offer the same level of waterproofing (down to a depth of 100 meters). Battery life has been improved on the new model too, with the official estimates standing at 5-8 days for the Oura Ring 4, and 6-9 days for the Oura Ring 5.

As for sensors and health tracking features, this is where the rings are mostly tied. Oura says the fifth-generation model is more accurate because of a change in the sensor layout, but the core sensor tech is the same between the two models, and the software experience through the app is the same for tracking steps, activity, heart rate, and more.

Oura Ring 5 vs Oura Ring 4: Verdict

There's clearly a lot that's new and improved in the Oura Ring 5: it's slimmer and lighter, and offers better battery life. Oura says it's also more accurate, though that's not something we've finished testing ourselves just yet. That said, the tracking capabilities, sensors, and app features are more or less identical between the models.

Where the Oura Ring 4 really has the potential to outdo the newer model is in terms of pricing. As time goes on, you're likely to see bigger and bigger discounts on the fourth-generation model — and don't forget that we awarded it our Health & Fitness Device of the Year award for 2025. It's a seriously impressive bit of kit, and if the right discount comes along during Amazon Prime Day, it'll certainly be a better-value package than the Ring 5.

Regardless, you'll need to weigh up what's most important to you for your next smart ring, and how much you're prepared to spend to get it. Both of these premium smart rings from Oura will give you years of use — so we might be talking about the Oura Ring 6 before you need to think about upgrading again.

More Prime Day deals in the US

• Amazon Devices: Fire Sticks & Echo from $18
• Amazon Haul: viral gadgets, tech & appliances from $1.99
• Apple: MacBooks, AirPods & AirTags from $29
• Beauty: 50% off toothbrushes & hair tools
• Cheap TVs: smart TVs from $69.99
• Garden: tools, mowers, planters from $24.99
• Headphones: 50% off Beats, Bose & Samsung
• Laptops: Apple, HP & Dell from $199
• Mattresses: Sealy, Serta & more from $186
• Patio: outdoor furniture, rugs & decor from $19.99
• Sports: 50% off fitness gear, treadmills & clothing
• Vacuums: Dyson, Shark & Bissell from $34

More Prime Day deals in the UK

• Amazon Prime: sign up for a 30-day free trial
• Amazon Devices: Fire TV, Ring & Blink from £24.99
• Amazon Haul: up to 30% off
• Apple: AirPods Pro 3 for a record-low price
• Appliances: up to 45% off Ninja, Tefal & Sage
• Beauty: up to 60% off Philips & Oral-B
• Essentials: household goods from under £10
• Fashion: up to 50% off
• Headphones: up to 50% off
• Laptops: from £149.99
• Tablets: Samsung & Lenovo from £125
• Toys: up to 25% off Lego and Tonies
• TVs: from £129.99
• Vacuums: up to 40% off Eufy & Roborock
• Wearables: Garmin & Huawei from £36.99

• TechRadar is running a live Q&A in the lead-up to our Oura Ring 5 review
• Leave a comment with what you're most interested in hearing about below
• You can ask questions all week before the Q&A closes

The Oura Ring 5 only started shipping just over a week ago, but it's already causing a stir, with early impressions mostly positive across the board — thanks to being such a substantial, visible upgrade over the previous model.

I'm currently testing what Oura claims to be "the world's smallest smart ring", and while I can't yet access every feature in the app — some require at least 30 days of continuous wear to establish personal health baselines — the ring design itself is a big step up.

It's significantly more petite than the Oura Ring 4, both in form and weight, which gives it a much better fit and makes it more comfortable to wear. While I'm still in the process of determining a final verdict on its performance, accuracy and value, I'm happy to answer any questions you might have.

Want to know if it feels noticeably different compared to the Ring 4? If you can still wear it while typing or lifting weights without it feeling bulky? Or how long the battery really lasts? Drop your question in the comment box below, and I'll get back to you.

This live Q&A will remain open until early next week, when my Oura Ring 5 review will be published. Because I won't yet have unlocked every new feature that's available, my verdict will be based on an early assessment of what I have been able to test in just over two weeks.

That's why I'm opening this testing period up to you. I want to know what your biggest questions are about what could be the best smart ring available. Of course, I'll be looking at its price, design, features, and performance to determine a final value score, but I know that won't cover everything.

There are countless questions I imagine many of you will likely have before clicking buy on a $399 / £399 / AU$649 smart ring — or $499 / £499 / AU$799 if you're considering one of the more premium finishes — so let me know what you're weighing up, and I'll try to help where I can.

What are TechRadar saying about the Oura Ring 5?

I already know from the early results of the poll above that most TechRadar readers don't want to spend the extra $50 / £50 / AU$80 that the Ring 5 costs over the Ring 4, but many of you said you would wait to see what the reviews say.

If that's you, this is your chance to get a behind-the-scenes look at the testing process. As I noted above, I haven't yet been able to explore all the new features Oura Ring 5 brings, but some of the basic features are unlocked after 10 days of wear, so I can give you early answers on whether they're actually useful.

Which brings me to another caveat, because I live in the UK, I don't have access to every new feature that Oura is currently rolling out, which means I won't be able to test the new 'Lab Uploads', 'Brain Health Study,' and 'Health Radar' at all.

That's a shame because those three features are among the most sought after, judging by the results of the above poll, which shows that the majority (40%) of TechRadar readers are most excited to try 'Health Radar: Blood Pressure Signals'.

'Brain Health Study', 'Nighttime Breathing', which is part of 'Health Radar', and 'Lab Uploads' also ranked highly among readers, raising the question of whether the Oura Ring 5 is most suited to those who live stateside.

Let me know if missing out on those new features is a deal breaker for you? I'll be considering all aspects, like these regional limitations, in my review.

• This Whoop hack matches heart rate to meeting attendees
• It can link coworkers with higher levels of stress
• The unofficial hack was made with the help of Claude Fable 5 AI

We've seen several examples of people hacking their Whoop bands before (including recently), but nothing quite on this level: one enterprising user has hooked his Whoop up to his meetings schedule on Google Calendar, and can now work out which of his coworkers raise his stress levels the most.

Developer Pankaj Tanwar posted his custom-made setup on X, and it's clearly something a lot of other people are interested in — at the time of writing there are more than 10 million views registered on the post.

We don't get too much in the way of detail about how this was done, but Tanwar says he used the Claude Fable AI model to reverse engineer his Whoop and extract the heart rate data. That was then matched up with calendar meetings, and the colleagues attending.

"I now have a leaderboard and I think about it daily," says Tanwar, who has sensibly edited his screenshot so that we can't actually see which people get his blood boiling more than others. It's a really neat idea and a great example of a hardware and software hack that produces some genuinely interesting data.

More please

Of course this isn't an exact science — heart rate can vary for all kinds of reasons, including time of day and eating and drinking routines. It's possible that it's the subjects of the meetings that are getting Tanwar's heart rate spiking, rather than the coworkers that are sitting in there with him.

Still, it's a fun experiment, and even if the Whoop isn't correctly identifying the colleagues that cause the most stress, the data can be used to manage health and well-being during the working day, in and out of meetings.

It's something I'd love to have on my own fitness tracker: the sort of insight that these AI-enhanced trackers should be giving us. Which colleague annoys me the most? What parts of my commute are the most stressful? Which TV shows calm me down?

This is also more evidence for the increasingly capable AI models that we're all getting access to. Fable 5 has only just been released to the world at large, and is already being used to produce next-level apps and tools with just a few lines of prompting — see also these alternative Fitbit apps.

• A certification listing has been spotted for a device believed to be the Garmin Cirqa
• It lists Bluetooth as the only connectivity option, suggesting this won't have Wi-Fi or GPS
• That puts it in line with rival screenless wearables

If you’ve been looking forward to the Garmin Cirqa, we’ve got some slightly disappointing but unsurprising news — it seems this screenless wearable will lack ANT+, GPS, and Wi-Fi.

This is according to a certification listing for a device believed to be the Cirqa found on the Integrated Regulatory Information System (IRIS) in Singapore, as spotted by The5kRunner (via NotebookCheck).

The listing reveals just Bluetooth for connectivity, which means the Garmin Cirqa — assuming that’s what this is — would need to be paired with a smartphone in close proximity in order to track things like distances and routes when running or cycling.

So if you prefer to work out without your phone, this rumored wearable might not be the one for you.

Putting it in line with rivals

While that’s a shame, it’s not really surprising considering that rival screenless devices like the Fitbit Air and Whoop 5.0 also lack built-in GPS.

But that means the Cirqa will probably fall in line with them, rather than rising above them. This could have been a clear differentiation that would help Garmin’s upcoming device beat its key rivals, but the brand seemingly hasn’t taken that opportunity.

Still, for those who already wear a Garmin watch, or simply like the Garmin brand but want something without a screen, the Cirqa will probably still be the obvious choice, so there’s likely to be a built-in audience for it.

We’ll probably find out exactly what the Garmin Cirqa has to offer — and whether it has any other ways of standing out — soon, with previous leaks pointing to a mid-2026 launch.

• There's now an open source app available for Whoop bands
• You can install it for free on Android and macOS
• Whoop has yet to respond, but may block access to its trackers

If you own a Whoop band or have read any of our Whoop reviews, you'll know that the premium fitness tracker comes with a monthly subscription attached. However, thanks to the efforts of an independent developer though, you can now get at your Whoop data without paying anything.

The app is open source, available for Android and macOS, and called Noop (via Android Central). You do need to do a little bit of work to get it set up (it needs to be sideloaded on Android), but instructions are provided on the GitHub page. It should work with the Whoop 4.0, Whoop 5.0, and the Whoop MG bands.

"I built it for one reason," the app creator Kabir Khalil said in a post on Reddit. "To read my own data, off a strap I own, on a machine I control, without it living in someone else's cloud. That's the whole idea."

As Whoop's own algorithms aren't available to the developer, Khalil says he's used "my own maths" based on "published methods" to come up with fitness scores and data interpretations from the raw figures that are grabbed from the tracker device.

Positive feedback

While the idea of a cloud-free, offline experience will appeal to many, it's the zero cost that Whoop users will be most interested in. Whoop subscriptions start at $199 / £169 / AU$299 per year, though the device itself is included in that cost.

And users seem to be keen to give this a try: "this looks awesome" one Redditor has commented, in a thread that's full of positive feedback (as well as some requests for technical help from those who are having trouble getting the app working).

We've contacted Whoop about the app and will include the company's response here if we get one, but it clearly won't be happy about users sidestepping the need for a subscription on their hardware. It's possible that future updates to the bands will lock out access for third-party apps like this one.

Noop does seem to be part of a small trend however. A similar app called Goose has also just popped up, though it's at an earlier stage in its development than Noop, and another one called Whoof has apparently been running for a little while now — so if you want an alternative Whoop app, you've now got several options.

Google Fitbit Air: One minute review

For a simple device, there’s a lot going on with the Google Fitbit Air. People feel very strongly about it, for better or for worse, and there’s been a lot of chatter and interest surrounding its release. My experience actually wearing the device has generally been very positive, with tracking accuracy comparable to that offered by my Apple Watch Ultra 3, which is pretty much the gold standard for wrist-based health tracking. Metrics relying on the tracker’s onboard heart-rate monitoring are reliable, matching the Apple Watch closely during work, rest, and exercise during my week with the Fitbit Air.

Set-and-forget trackers are clearly having a moment. Oura has released the Oura Ring 5 just one year after the Ring 4, and Whoop’s success has given rise to a number of copycats from brands looking to recreate the experience of a distraction-free screenless ‘focus band’ for a less premium price.

Google is one such copycat, but the screenless, slender form factor suits the Fitbit brand — the original Fitbit was a digital pedometer — down to the ground. It speaks to the core of what Fitbit used to be, before it became just another company churning out mediocre smartwatches running a limited proprietary operating system. Your Fitbit was always meant to be a discreet little device, and devices don’t come more discreet than the Google Fitbit Air. Weighing just 12g and using a very slender 17mm-wide band, the Fitbit Air is a lovely and (crucially) comfortable device to wear and use. It’s much more comfortable to wear during sleep than any full smartwatch I’ve ever tried (and I have tried a lot), or even the Whoop.

However, it’s hard to separate the Fitbit Air from the Google Health app, with Google’s redesign of the Fitbit app causing particular ire amongst Fitbit users. The app is a bit of a mess, and not intuitive to use, with features dotted all over the place. It feels like it’s designed to primarily function as a home for the AI Health Coach chatbot, which is very intelligent and perhaps the best in-app AI assistant I’ve tried, but it’s not the best way to operate a health app. Whoop’s balance of AI and on-page metrics is much better.

If you’re looking for a consistent screenless focus band to track different sorts of workouts like gym, sports, and yoga, alongside sleep, heart health and general wellness, you can use the Google Fitbit Air as is, paying just the up-front price, and keep your tracking simple.

Whether or not you can get onboard with the Premium option will depend on how much you like chatbots — I found its flexibility immensely helpful, but its constant chirpy summaries and insistence on hiding my data inside walls of text became annoying, so it’s a mixed bag for me. Overall, though, this is the best, most interesting Fitbit to have been released in years.

Google Fitbit Air: Price and availability

• $99.99 in the US
• £84.99 in the UK
• AU$199 in Australia

The Google Fitbit Air costs $99.99 / £84.99 / AU$199, and for that you get the tracker, a band of your choice, and a charger specific to the Google Fitbit Air — proving once again that Google seems to be allergic to making a charger that’s compatible with more than one device.

The Google Health Premium subscription, which gives you access to Google’s AI Health Coach, costs $9.99 / £7.99 / AU$14.99 a month, or $99.99 / £79.99 / AU$140 annually. Existing Google AI Pro members get it at no extra cost.

For comparison, the cheapest Apple Watch SE 3 starts at $249 / £219 / AU$399, while Whoop’s complex pricing structure begins at £169 / $199 / AU$299 per year for the lowest tier. The Google Fitbit Air’s pricing is cheap for what you get, with the Health Coach as an optional add-on rather than a mandatory subscription.

• Value score: 4.5/5

Google Fitbit Air review: Design

• Simple, screenless and elegant
• Light and comfortable
• App design is chaotic

The Google Fitbit Air’s design can be split into two components: the physical device, which is excellent, and the new Google Health app, which is a bit of a misfire.

Let’s start with the positives. The Fitbit Air comprises the tracker itself, and a wraparound band in a choice of three styles — a silicone Active band, the woven Performance Loop, or the polyurethane (pleather) Elevated Modern band. Each comes with their own color options, and a plastic clasp. On the underside of the tracker are the optical heart rate sensor, skin temperature sensor, and an accelerometer and gyroscope for counting steps.

It weighs just 12g, even with the Performance Loop strap, so it’s light and easy to wear, which is crucial for sleep tracking. I wore it on my right wrist, with a watch on my left during the day, and I didn’t feel like an obnoxious techie: unless someone looks closely, it just looks like a wristband, with the lack of a screen helping here. The Performance Loop strap that came with my review unit is the best-looking of the three options in this respect, but none of them look bad.

The tracker also has a haptic vibrate function — if you set an alarm in the app, this can be disabled with a tap on the top of the device. And that’s pretty much all the interaction you have with the sensor and band as a whole; everything else, as with one of the best smart rings or other screenless tracking options, is done via the app.

The app is where Google’s design falls down. Split into four tabs — Today, Fitness, Sleep and Health — the Google Health app features a dashboard with key metrics at the top, and insights or libraries of content below it.

But with information scattered across a quartet of tabs, it’s hard to find certain granular metrics or content you’re looking for compared to the old Fitbit app. I searched for Mindfulness content for 10 minutes before finding the five-minute meditation I was after, for example, and I often ended up starting new chats with the AI coach rather than resuming a chat from my history. It’s just not intuitive to use.

What is right in your face, for Premium users, is the AI coach, which cloaks your metrics in paragraphs of cheery text, so it takes longer to get to your information. It’s clever, and we’ll get onto its functionality in a moment, but I wish it summarized and contextualized less, and just offered more 'glanceability'.

• Design score: 3.5/5

Google Fitbit Air review: Features

• Set-and-forget tracker with a haptic alarm
• Good metrics
• AI Health Coach is a flexible macro-feature

The Fitbit Air records the usual metrics you’d expect with a modern fitness tracker, including step count, heart rate, floors climbed, sleep stages, and so forth. Fitbit’s Daily Readiness score shows you how prepared your body is for exercise, based on recent activity and sleep scores, while it also surfaces weekly cardio goals, hydration, and basic food logging. It can offer irregular heart rate rhythm notifications, which is great for potentially diagnosing atrial fibrilation, and allows you to take an ECG scan manually to monitor your heart health.

Basic tracking is all the free version gets you; there’s no workout builder, mindfulness content, way to log sickness, or any other extras beyond the numbers. It doesn’t add any special metrics for runners, such as stride or cadence, as many of the best running watches do. For some users who just want the numbers, this will be fine, with no need to subscribe to the Premium tier.

For Premium users, food logging can be done via the AI Health Coach, by taking a picture of your food. It’s very good at logging packaged food (it was bang on logging a crinkled package of chips with the message ‘log this’ as a 74kcal snack, also breaking down macros and salt content) but can struggle with plates of homemade food, although a basic description such as ‘log this lentil curry’ is enough for it to provide an estimation. The more information you can provide (weights and measures, etc), the more detailed it gets.

Those without the Health Coach can log food manually, as you can in other apps like MyFitnessPal.

The app also has access to Fitbit’s library of workout and meditation content, including individual moves, which you can use to build your own workout. Again, this is only available through the Premium subscription.

Through it all runs the AI Health Coach, which I actually found to be useful. Although there was no field to input illness as such, I typed my cold symptoms out to the Health Coach, and it remembered I was ill and adjusted its messaging and advice throughout the rest of the week based on my symptoms. I went to the gym without following one of the app’s pre-prescribed workouts, typed my sets and reps into the Coach’s ‘Ask Coach’ field, and it not only logged the workout, but suggested complementary routines to work different muscle groups for the rest of the week.

The AI Coach is a flexible ‘macro-feature’ that works well in conjunction with the rest of the app, and almost allows you to bypass the chaotic layout: you can just ask the Coach to serve you up what you need, which I’m sure was Google’s intent. Your use of the Coach will depend on your tolerance for chatbots: those who use Gemini or ChatGPT for everything will get a lot out of it, while those who loathe AI and just want numbers will likely loathe the Premium tier.

• Features score: 4/5

Google Fitbit Air review: Performance

• Performed well compared to the Apple Watch Ultra 3 in most scenarios
• Poor run estimations
• Battery life as described

As I noted when I compared the Google Fitbit Air against the Apple Watch Ultra 3, the tracker performed well during my 10K test run, at least for the metrics like heart rate and calorie count, which it can use its onboard sensors for. The metrics it uses my phone's GPS to estimate, like distance, were off significantly.

I’ve embedded the results below, but generally there was no statistically significant difference between heart rate or calorie estimations from the two devices. I'll be updating the review with confirmation of heart rate scores tested against a new Polar H10 chest strap, as my old testing unit has malfunctioned.

Previous

1 / 4

Next

Average heart rate

Google Fitbit Air

158

Apple Watch Ultra 3

161

050100150200

Average heart rate Data

Product	Value
Google Fitbit Air	158
Apple Watch Ultra 3	161

Average Pace

Google Fitbit Air

5.37

Apple Watch Ultra 3

5.47

01.534.56

Average Pace Data

Product	Value
Google Fitbit Air	5.37
Apple Watch Ultra 3	5.47

Calories burned

Google Fitbit Air

773

Apple Watch Ultra 3

750

0200400600800

Calories burned Data

Product	Value
Google Fitbit Air	773
Apple Watch Ultra 3	750

Distance

Google Fitbit Air

10.43

Apple Watch Ultra 3

10.03

03.757.511.2515

Kilometers

Distance Data

Product	Value
Google Fitbit Air	10.43
Apple Watch Ultra 3	10.03

My experience of tracking my sleep with the same two devices — I wore one on each wrist — was similar to the above, with close enough metrics but slightly different outcomes.

The Fitbit Air’s total sleep time estimation was within five minutes of the Apple Watch, and sleep stages were similar. However, while my sleep score was 90 with the Apple Watch, Fitbit registered it as only 81, citing a 10-point difference in sleep quality. However, the Google Fitbit Air’s sleep tracking has consistently registered my wake-up times during testing, successfully recording my early-hours bathroom trips and my cat jumping on my legs at 5am.

Because of the lack of a screen, GPS, and specialist metrics, regular runners won’t get a whole lot out of the Fitbit Air. Compared to my usual wealth of data from Apple or the best Garmin watches, I found it lacking, and my GPS map — imported from my phone, as the Air has no GPS of its own —- inaccurate, off by 400m compared to the Apple Watch.

Battery life is excellent, exceeding the seven days the device promised. Charging is fast, with just five minutes delivering a full day of battery life, and a full charge taking around an hour. The device is very comfortable to wear, as previously mentioned — I’ve barely needed to take it off all week.

• Performance score: 4.5 / 5

Google Fitbit Air: Scorecard

Google Fitbit Air: Should I buy?

Buy it if...

Don't buy it if...

Also consider

How I tested

I wore the Google Fitbit Air for eight days straight. I ran a 10K while wearing an Apple Watch Ultra 3 and (malfunctioning) Polar H10 chest strap, and a shorter run with a Huawei Watch Fit 5 Pro, as comparison testing alongside my usual workout routines. I also wore the Apple and Fitbit side-by-side during sleep. I tested its alarm, tried the features of its premium Health Coach, and used the app's workout and mindfulness content.

First reviewed: June 2026

• Samsung Galaxy Watch users are getting a completely redesigned health app with new features
• These new features include Vitals, Cardio Load and a dedicated Heart Health score
• The app is now AI-first, designed to turn Galaxy Watches into 'AI-powered health companions'

Samsung Galaxy Watch and Samsung Galaxy Ring users are going to see some big changes in the Samsung Health app. Referred to as 'a new experience' by Samsung press material, the redesigned health app includes new metrics and AI-powered summaries to break it all down for you.

Samsung says the new app 'uses AI to translate overnight and daily biometric data into personalized health guidance, helping users better understand everything from recovery and heart health to training load and overall wellbeing'.

This sounds familiar. Fitbit has recently undergone a complete AI-first redesign, too, including a name change to Google Health. It's not all been sunshine and roses, as many Fitbit users intensely dislike the forced pivot to AI, with what was Fitbit Premium now entirely revolving around its new AI Google Health Coach tool.

Samsung Health already uses AI in the background, such as using machine learning to calculate stats like your Energy Score, but this redesigned app is also shifting generative AI to the forefront. The timing of this move is likely to draw serious ire from Samsung users.

Don't panic, Samsung users

Fortunately, it's not as bad as all that, despite Samsung's similar AI-forward messaging and app redesign, so Galaxy Watch users can lower their pitchforks (for now). For one thing, Samsung hasn't introduced a paywall to Samsung Health; otherwise, there would be riots in the streets.

Second, on closer inspection, the redesign is also slightly less drastic than Google's: rather than being entirely oriented around an AI chatbot, as Google Health has chosen to do, Samsung has instead decided to use GenAI to summarize and explain your metrics, adding new ones so the user can drill down into different aspects of their health in more detail.

Existing tools such as Samsung's Sleep Score, Energy Score, and Antioxidant Index remain, and Samsung hasn't announced that it's removing any features — again, unlike Fitbit and Google, which removed features like Badges and Challenges.

I've listed all the new features below. Each of these features will get contextual AI summaries, explaining what the numbers mean and, where necessary, how to improve them.

• Vitals: Similar to Apple Health's feature, Vitals will analyze 'five key overnight bio-signals — heart rate, heart rate variability, respiratory rate, skin temperature, and blood oxygen — against their true resting baseline'. Essentially, Samsung will notify you if one or more of these metrics are abnormal, indicating you might be getting sick.
• Heart Health Score: Combining Samsung's Vascular Load metric with the Body Composition features on its watches, which can measure muscle and fat in the same way as the best smart scales. If you've got low Vascular Load and an in-range body fat percentage, your Heart Health Score is likely to be good.
• Daily Cardio Load: Accumulated strain based on recent cardiovascular exercise, like runs and cycle rides. Will contribute to your Energy Score.
• Fitness Index: A radar chart of five different metrics (Strength, Flexibility, Endurance, Cardio, Body Composition). The strangest so far: how Samsung intends to accurately measure flexibility with a Galaxy Watch remains a mystery to me. I've reached out to Samsung to clarify this.

The timing of this upgrade is certainly interesting: reports recently surfaced of a Samsung Galaxy Fit 4 that, when paired with this AI-powered Samsung Health upgrade, would make for a real Google Fitbit Air contender.

Today, smart wearables and health tracking apps are part of everyday life for millions of people in the UK. From heart rate and blood oxygen levels to continuous glucose readings and home ECGs, a growing share of the population is generating real time health data from their wrist, phone or patch.

This is more than a consumer trend: it is fundamentally changing how patients understand their own health and their awareness of what medical technology can offer. Patients no longer arrive at appointments in the dark about their health.

Rather, they present months of data to clinicians, who can then use this information to support their own decision-making.

It is important, however, to distinguish between consumer wellness wearables and regulated medical devices (such as CE- or UKCA-marked technologies) that inform diagnosis and treatment in clinical pathways supported by NICE guidance.

We see this shift towards on-the-go health tech across the industry including developers of wearable cardiac monitors, continuous glucose systems, therapeutic wearables and portable diagnostic tools.

The public taking prevention into their own hands

Wearables have not only normalized constant and convenient access to health information, but have also empowered individuals to take personal responsibility for their own health. Checking a resting heart rate or sleep pattern has become routine, often prompting earlier referral to NHS services when anomalies appear.

Fitness trackers were the catalyst, but the public is now increasingly familiar with clinically focused technologies. Their presence in pharmacies, online, and in the media has raised awareness that precise, preventative tools exist, even when not supplied through the NHS.

Patient autonomy and appetite for diagnostics

This growth in patient autonomy has direct implications for health tech adoption. A decade ago, wearing a cardiac monitor for longer than 24 hours might have deterred patients; today, many people have adapted to this change, wearing devices day and night.

Key implications of this shift for health tech adoption include:

1. Willingness to use clinical devices: Familiarity with wearables makes patients open to long-term clinical monitoring if it yields a definitive result.

2. Stronger demand for accuracy: Patients understand that a 24-hour snapshot can miss intermittent issues and are more inclined to support technologies that monitor over days or weeks, even if this requires more commitment in the short term.

3. Reduced tolerance for repeat appointments caused by inconclusive tests: Once patients realize high-quality data prevents repeated hospital visits, they naturally prefer comprehensive, first-time investigation.

Ambulatory ECG monitoring illustrates this well. Traditional 24-hour Holter monitors frequently miss intermittent arrhythmias, leading to delayed diagnoses and increased stroke risk. Modern devices monitoring for 14 days provide higher diagnostic yields and a far better patient experience.

When tariffs lag behind patient expectations

Unfortunately, we often see that NHS reimbursement structures rarely keep pace. Long-term monitoring technologies are often grouped under the same tariff codes as short-duration, less accurate options.

In ambulatory ECG, for example, extended continuous monitoring is frequently reimbursed at the same rate as a basic Holter monitor. This structurally disincentivizes providers from adopting more effective diagnostics, compelling Trusts to rely on cheaper, short-term tests that fit existing codes but result in avoidable repeat appointments.

To harness patient autonomy in support of health tech adoption, reimbursement must recognize wider system benefits - such as avoided admissions and reduced outpatient appointments - rather than focusing solely on unit cost.

Supporting bringing care closer to home

These issues are particularly relevant in the context of the Neighbourhood Health Framework and 10 Year Health Plan. Moving toward integrated neighborhood teams and prevention-focused, community-based care depends on timely insight into patient risk.

Neighborhood teams are expected to manage long term conditions closer to home, prevent avoidable non-elective admissions and reduce pressure on acute services. Virtual wards are already doing this at scale: in January 2026, more than 11,000 patients in England were being cared for on virtual wards, with around 90% of the 12,700 available ‘beds’ occupied. Patient-generated data from wearables can support this by flagging risk earlier, enabling timely intervention and safe remote follow-up.

Longer term monitoring, postal diagnostic pathways and remote review are consistent with the Framework’s aims. They can contribute to mandated success measures, including reductions in non-elective admissions and bed days, improvements in cardiovascular and diabetes outcomes, better access and fewer avoidable outpatient appointments.

However, local providers will only realize this potential if adoption and market access mechanisms are aligned. If tariffs and coding frameworks undervalue longer-term monitoring, local systems will struggle to invest in the tools that best support these objectives.

Harnessing the “wearable generation” for system change

The rise of health tracking has created a population comfortable with health data, more focused on prevention and more aware of the possibilities of health technology. Whilst this can lead to more ‘worried well’ presentations - where non‑specific alerts from consumer wearables drive anxiety and extra GP appointments - it is largely an asset for the NHS.

The answer is not to discourage engagement, but to channel it. Clear guidance on how consumer data should be interpreted, and regulated devices with proven accuracy sitting within structured pathways rather than operating in isolation, can reduce unnecessary demand while accelerating appropriate diagnosis and treatment.

If procurement and commissioning are adjusted to reflect this reality, informed patients can accelerate responsible health tech adoption. They are already willing to track their health, use monitoring devices for longer periods and engage with digital tools if this results in clearer answers and less time on waiting lists.

The task now is to ensure that adoption pathways, tariffs and neighborhood care models are designed to support this engagement and to translate prevention on the wrist into better outcomes for patients and the health system.

We feature the best telemedicine software.

This article was produced as part of TechRadar Pro Perspectives, our channel to feature the best and brightest minds in the technology industry today.

The views expressed here are those of the author and are not necessarily those of TechRadarPro or Future plc. If you are interested in contributing find out more here: https://www.techradar.com/pro/perspectives-how-to-submit

• Samsung could be developing the Galaxy Fit 4 for a 2026 launch
• It won't be showcased at Galaxy Unpacked 2026, and will instead go on sale in September
• We don't know how much it will cost or what its new features are, but Samsung could give it a GPS boost

Affordable fitness trackers are rising in popularity, and Samsung could be gearing up to launch its next Galaxy Fit model — just as Google launched its budget-friendly Google Fitbit Air.

SamMobile first reported on the rumor, who claims it received information that Samsung is currently developing the next gen device in its lineup of budget wearables, which it says will launch later this year. It would mark the first Galaxy Fit device since the Galaxy Fit 3 from 2024.

The Fit 3 made our list of the best fitness trackers, and it's easy to see why:, they’re solid options for fitness novices who want a simple device with enough health monitoring tools.

The original report says the Galaxy Fit 4 is due for a September launch around the time of IFA 2026, which is set to take place from September 4-8. That said, the outlet also mentions that it’s unlikely that we’ll see the device make an appearance at Galaxy Unpacked 2026 in July, and will instead go straight to launch alongside the Galaxy Tab S12 and the Galaxy S26 FE.

Despite the launch date information, it’s difficult to pinpoint exactly what improvements Samsung plans to make with the device, but we have a hunch at what it won’t be getting.

It’s unlikely that the Galaxy Fit 4 will be able to run Wear OS like its Galaxy Watch sibling range, and will probably still run on the RTOS system like its predecessor. This is because of Samsung’s cost-cutting strategy, skipping the full power of Wear OS so it can list the device for a more affordable price, though we don’t know how much the Galaxy Fit 4 will cost just yet.

As for health tracking features, it’s unclear if there’ll be any new additions joining its roster of basic functions, but we’re confident that it’ll allow you to make the most of tools such as step, heart rate, and sleep tracking, as well as control music playback and phone notifications. It may even get some more AI-powered Samsung Health features to steal the Fitbit's lunch.

The most likely upgrade would be the addition of GPS, which the Galaxy Fit 3 doesn’t have. If Samsung gave the Galaxy Fit 4 a GPS boost, it would not only allow you to track outdoor activity more precisely, but it would also mean you can use your on-wrist device without needing to have it connected to your smartphone.

As we’ve seen with the Google Fitbit Air, basic fitness trackers seem to be all the hype at the moment. I can see why this is; why spend money on a premium smartwatch like the Apple Watch Ultra 3 if you know you don’t need all the advanced bells and whistles?

Although Samsung’s Galaxy Fit devices aren’t screenless, they still sit in the same ballpark as screenless fitness trackers due to their limited, yet sufficient health functions, adequate smartphone controls, and affordable price points.

Now that everyone’s flocking to the Fitbit Air, it creates tough competition for Samsung to really pull through with the Fit 4. However, Samsung could have the upper-hand if it chooses to bestow GPS upon the Galaxy Fit 4 — which the Fitbit Air doesn’t have.

The Google Fitbit Air is here, and early adopters are getting to grips with the new screenless fitness tracker and its AI-powered premium Google Health Coach.

I've shared my early thoughts after a few hours of testing and we've covered existing Fitbit users' disappointment and anger over some of the app changes — but how does it compare against an Apple Watch, perhaps the best-known and certainly the most commonly-spotted fitness wearable on wrists everywhere?

To find out, I went on a 10-kilometer evening run (braving the UK heatwave) with the Google Fitbit Air on one hand, and the Apple Watch Ultra 3 on the other. I was also wearing the Polar H10 heart rate monitor, intending to use it as a litmus test for accuracy, but the chest strap malfunctioned so I don't have any meaningful results to publish here.

I'm primarily looking at metrics such as heart rate and calories burned. Both wearables use optical heart rate sensors — LED lights that monitor blood flow on your wrist to estimate your heart rate. The estimation of calories burned combines your heart rate data with movement data and other metrics to calculate your energy expenditure.

As well as calories burned and average heart rate, I've included the results for average pace here too. I'm expecting the Apple Watch, with its built-in GPS, to be more accurate than the Fitbit Air, which is piggybacking off the GPS from my iPhone as it doesn't have any GPS capabilities itself.

It's also worth noting I have not linked Google Health and Apple Health at the time of writing, so these results are separate.

The results

Below are the results from my 10km run. Tap the 'next' tab on the graph to cycle through all three metrics.

Previous

1 / 4

Next

Average heart rate

Google Fitbit Air

158

Apple Watch Ultra 3

161

050100150200

Average heart rate Data

Product	Value
Google Fitbit Air	158
Apple Watch Ultra 3	161

Average Pace

Google Fitbit Air

5.37

Apple Watch Ultra 3

5.47

01.534.56

Average Pace Data

Product	Value
Google Fitbit Air	5.37
Apple Watch Ultra 3	5.47

Calories burned

Google Fitbit Air

773

Apple Watch Ultra 3

750

0200400600800

Calories burned Data

Product	Value
Google Fitbit Air	773
Apple Watch Ultra 3	750

Distance

Google Fitbit Air

10.43

Apple Watch Ultra 3

10.03

03.757.511.2515

Kilometers

Distance Data

Product	Value
Google Fitbit Air	10.43
Apple Watch Ultra 3	10.03

As you can see in the graphs above, both heart rate and calorie readings are quite close. The average heart rate for my workout was just a 3bpm difference between the Apple Watch Ultra 3 and the Google Fitbit Air. It would have been nice to have information from my chest strap to compare this as well, but I'll try this again before my full review with a different electrical heart rate monitor.

However, on previous tests the Apple Watch Ultra 3 matched the electrical heart rate monitor exactly, indicating that the Google Fitbit Air is pretty dang accurate too.

Likewise, the calorie counts on both wearables were relatively similar, with the Google Fitbit Air exceeding the Apple Watch Ultra 3's calculation by less than 25 calories. No two wearables are going to be exactly alike here, but this is close enough that I'd feel comfortable using the Google Fitbit Air day-to-day.

Average pace is a different matter. As previously mentioned, the Google Fitbit Air has no onboard GPS of its own, and although it showed a lovely map of my route obtained via my iPhone's GPS, it also overestimated my pace and thought I was a whole 10 seconds faster per kilometer than the Apple Watch did.

I know how my paces feel — it was a hot day and I had steep declines and inclines at either end of my run, so I ran slower than my usual brisk clip. I'm far more inclined to agree with Apple's assessment than the Fitbit's pace estimation here. Apple also gave me far more detail about my run, such as stride length and vertical oscillation (how bouncy I was during the run), whereas the Google Fitbit Air collects no such information. What Fitbit does surface, however, is steps taken during the workout (9,342 to be precise), which the Apple Watch Ultra 3 doesn't.

Fitbit also massively overestimated my run at 10.43km rather than 10.03km, even though it shows exactly the same map as my Apple Watch, with an identical finishing point, as you can see below in the comparison pic. Unlike 3bpm or 23kcal, over 400 meters and 10 seconds of pace are big differences.

Apple Fitness

Google Health

Analysis

In terms of the metrics relying on the onboard heart rate monitor, the $99.99 / £84.99 / AU$199 Google Fitbit Air is very accurate compared to the $799 / £749 / AU$1,399 Apple Watch Ultra 3.

I wouldn't have expected the Google Fitbit Air to be as reliable for run tracking as one of the best running watches, considering it doesn't even have GPS — as long as it's consistent for casual users, that'll be fine for most people. Anyone (like me) who cares enough to want maps, technique information like stride length, and pinpoint-accurate pace will likely gravitate towards a dedicated running watch anyway. Still, I was hoping for a smaller difference here.

The Apple Watch Ultra 3 has proven itself to be a very accurate wrist-based optical heart rate solution, so far superseded only by dedicated heart rate monitors. Based on this, I'm happy the Google Fitbit Air cleaves closely to this standard — although it's a shame I can't rely on GPS data harvested from my phone for more than a rough estimation.

• The Oura Ring 5 has a smaller design, longer battery life and higher price tag
• Six new features are coming to the Oura app, but not for all members
• You can pre-order today and have it delivered by June 4

The Oura Ring 5 is officially here, and it’s a big step up from last year's model. Oura says it has completely overhauled the design, making it 40% smaller, lighter, longer-lasting, more accurate and its most scratch-resistant ring yet.

Almost everything has been completely redesigned, allowing it to last for up to a week (we noted six days of charge in our Oura Ring 4 review), take more accurate, consistent readings thanks to a new signal architecture that uses more powerful LEDs and sensors, and be less susceptible to scratches because of a new extra-strong 'physical vapour deposition' coating.

Even the portable charging case has had a nifty upgrade; while the previous generation was buttonless, there’s a new dedicated button to make it easier to see the battery status and quickly pair with your device. On top of this, Oura is also adding 'Locate' to help you keep track of where your smart ring is, which will also be available for the Oura Ring 4.

Priced at $99 / £99 / AU$159 for the case, and $399 / £399 / AU$649 for base finishes (silver and black) and $499 / £499 / AU$799 for more premium styles (there’s a new shade of gold and deep rose on top of the usual brushed silver and ‘stealth’ options), the Oura Ring 5 is more expensive than the previous generation and rivals, like the Samsung Galaxy Ring and Amazfit Helio Ring. Although the upgraded case will cost the same as last year's model at $99 / £99 / AU$159.

Pre-orders are available now, with shipping set to start on June 4. Because the smart ring is significantly smaller than the previous generation, Oura is encouraging existing customers looking to upgrade to use their dedicated Oura Ring 5 sizing kit, as the fit may feel different at the same size.

Membership remains $5.99 / £5.99 / AU$9.99 a month ($69.99 / £69.99 / AU$109.99 a year), which is great because there are various new features rolling out to different regions and generations. Not all of these will be available at the same time, though.

Every new app feature coming to Oura Ring owners

When the new smart ring launches, Oura Ring members will get several new features, including 'Live Activity Tracking' for seeing your health metrics in real-time while working out, ‘Menopause Insights’ for assessing sleep, mood, cognition and daily functioning symptoms, and 'Hormonal Birth Control', which builds upon its existing 'Cycle Insights' dashboard by offering a "first-of-its-kind" view into how biometrics shift across hormone and hormone-free days.

The two latter features have already been introduced in the US as part of Oura's continued expansion into women’s health data, making this a great free update for all existing subscribers around the world.

On June 30, 'Lab Uploads' will also launch globally, allowing members to import their lab and blood work directly into the Oura app to help compare lab results alongside their Oura biometric data.

With even more personal health data being tracked and stored in the app, Oura has added a new security protection tool that lets you delete your stored data from a specific time window without having to cancel your entire account, which will be available to all members at launch.

Those in the US are also set to get even more new features as part of the launch. Starting today (May 28), you'll have the choice to opt into a new 'Brain Health Study' to measure how your sleep, stress and behaviour relate to your brain’s cognitive function and body’s performance. The study has been developed with Cambridge Cognition, a neuroscience technology company in the UK.

Launching at the start of June is 'Health Radar', a new always-on data collecting feature for estimated blood pressure readings and nighttime breathing that builds on 'Symptom Radar' alert system, and 'Health Records', which builds on the new 'Lab Uploads' by letting you store all your clinical reports in one place.

These updates are all part of Oura's mission to help find more 'actionable' solutions from their health insights. Oura has partnered with an on-demand care platform called Counsel Health, that connects medical AI with licensed physicians so that you can ask questions directly in the app and get personalized medical advice from licensed healthcare providers .

Last but certainly not least, members can expect GLP-1 medication self-management to come to the app as part of an expansion of its metabolic health offering. Oura says that global adoption is projected to surpass 100 million by 2030, making this a great solution for patients that have to juggle several apps for tracking dosages and biometrics.

Oura’s chief product officer, Holly Shelton, says the "Oura Ring 5 is the most significant leap in smart ring history". Looking at the new specs and features announced, this could set a new standard in smart rings as it also delivers on almost every upgrade we wanted to see for the Oura Ring 5 (the price is higher than we expected). But of course we’ll have to test it out ourselves to confirm that.

I’ve only had access to the Google Fitbit Air and the new Google Health app for a few hours, at the time of writing, and already there are some interesting things to say about one of this year's biggest contenders for the best fitness tracker crown.

While the stats and numbers you get in the free tier are a little basic, they’re roughly in line with what you’d expect from a $99.99 / £84.99 / AU$199 tracker. But it’s the premium AI health coach that’s impressed me with its ability to incorporate contextual information and change your weekly plan just by chatting to it.

The tracker is light and comfortable, it’s got some cool features even at the free tier, and Whoop (the other big player in the screenless fitness tracker space) should be worried.

While Whoop offers more detailed metrics, it’s also prohibitively expensive and doesn’t allow you to buy the fitness tracker or use it for free after purchase in any form: it entirely relies on an expensive subscription service starting at £169 / $199 / AU$299 annually, and going up from there. Cancel that subscription, and it’s just an inert hunk of plastic. You can read all about it in my Google Fitbit Air vs Whoop breakdown.

My early impression of the Google Fitbit Air and its Google Health Premium AI coaching service is that it’s designed to help beginner-to-frequently-training athletes, with simple metrics, round numbers, and a friendly interface that does a lot of its calculations behind the scenes.

Those who are already heavily invested in Whoop’s ecosystem won’t get the granularity of data they are used to, and thus might not be tempted by the lower price of the Fitbit. However, for the rest of us, I think this is going to do very well.

Design and comfort

The Google Fitbit Air weighs just 12g. It’s light, slender, and the performance loop band I’m wearing is very comfortable, although it does have a tendency to get a little… dank during a very sweaty workout, such as my first test run completed during a heatwave here in the UK.

It offers no interaction on the device at all, just a charging LED. As I said in previous pieces, it’s almost like an older pedometer-style Fitbit that clipped to your clothes, just in a modern form factor and made by Google.

I have to say, it’s very unobtrusive, being around two-thirds the width of the Whoop MG. It’s very easy to wear this in conjunction with another device or a non-smart analog watch on the other wrist. Funnily enough, that’s exactly what I’ve been doing.

Early comparison testing

I immediately incorporated the Google Fitbit Air into my smartwatch testing routine. I went on two runs with the Huawei Watch Fit 5 Pro on one hand (the device I’m currently closing out on testing, which on previous runs matched very closely with the Garmin Fenix 8 Pro), a Polar H10 chest strap, and the Google Fitbit Air on the other.

Unfortunately, the usually pinpoint-accurate chest strap malfunctioned, but the average heart rate between the two wrist-based wearables was just 1bpm apart. I know the Huawei Watch Fit 5 Pro is quite accurate based on previous testing, so it’s a positive early sign, but before my full review I’ll be using a (working) chest strap to test the Google Fitbit Air.

What I was most impressed with was the Google Health Coach, the app’s flagship AI feature that encompasses everything else. After a brief chat about my goals, it set up an early plan for me, comprised of three gym sessions and two runs a week, to build muscle while maintaining baseline cardiovascular fitness.

After I completed my test runs, Google noted the extreme weather here in the UK, and mentioned it in the workout’s summary as something to take into account when viewing my metrics, as my heart rate was likely to be higher than normal. Very clever: exactly the sort of contextual information fitness trackers have been missing since their inception, pulled in automatically using location and weather data as well as fitness data.

Impressed, I tapped the ever-present blue ‘Ask Coach’ button and typed “I might swap one of my gym sessions for a long run this week. Can you update my plan?”

Hey presto: not only did it update my plan, but it also surfaced the Long Endurance Run activity profile for me to use on my next running day. I must admit, my early experiment with this AI Health Coach is a resounding success.

But at what cost?

All of this, unfortunately, comes at the expense of existing Fitbit badges and features. The app has been renamed, rebranded and redesigned overnight, with all badges and community features lost in favor of the AI-first approach.

Existing Fitbit users are not happy: on the Fitbit subreddit, one complaint thread garnered over 1,500 upvotes and over 600 comments, with users mentioning they are "beyond frustrated" at the changes and calling the app "slop", or a victim of "enshittification".

A particular target of criticism is the food logging feature, which I’ve not yet tried, but Google says "fixes are coming".

Coros has been launching sports watches and wearables for less than ten years. In that time it’s done enough good to see its name mentioned in the same sentence as the best Garmin watches, Polar and Suunto models.

Whether that’s hitting the sweet spot for price, features and performance with watches like the Coros Pace 4 or rolling out big software features, Coros is making ground on competition that has been around for much longer.

Like those brands, Coros is always looking at what’s next to ensure it remains in the sports wearable conversation for many years to come. In 2025, Coros launched the Coros Nomad, an outdoor watch that became its first to include a microphone. Since then, mics have been added to its Pace 4 and Apex 4 watches.

Microphones popping up on sports watches isn’t unique to Coros. Garmin’s Venu 2 Plus, launched in 2022, was the first Garmin watch to include one alongside a speaker. That was to enable calls over Bluetooth and to let you engage with your phone’s smart assistant, along with simple on-watch commands such as setting timers. Since then, Garmin has rolled out similar hardware to a host of its watches, such as the Garmin Fenix 8 and Forerunner ranges.

Coros has taken a different approach to giving its watches a voice. It’s not using mics to build a watch that behaves more like one of the best Apple Watches or a Wear OS smartwatch. Instead, voice pins — a feature that’s available on the Pace 4, Apex 4 and Nomad watches — allow users to record voice notes during workouts and mark where it was on a GPS map of your run. Voice pins are used to capture how you felt during the session or to remind you of the conditions for the next time you tackle that route.

“We believe voice is the future,” Coros co-founder and CEO Lewis Wu tells us. “When the era of AI comes in, a lot of the interaction between the watch or the app with consumers will change. Voice is the easiest way for the system or app to understand you. With the AI in the background, that can give you feedback. It’s like two-way communication.

“If you look at training, it’s more than pace and heart rate. Training is also about your subjective opinion, like how you feel. If I feel tired, my legs are sore or my ankle has an issue, these are all things that a coach wants to know — and now AI will know this.

“The more information consumers put into the computer, into AI, the better the system will understand you. This is why we built microphones in every single new watch going forward because we believe that's the future. If you want to get future-proof hardware or a running watch for yourself, consider those with a microphone. This is our vision.”

Using voice to shape how its watches can be better training companions isn’t the only thing on the agenda for Coros as it looks ahead. It also wants to take existing features that have been present on its watches for much longer than the voice ones and make them work better for users.

“We are committed to building a better wellness system,” says Wu. “I have to admit, our health and wellness system is not top notch. We need to get better, but the way we get better could be slightly different from other companies.” This seems to be an acknowledgment of features such as sleep monitoring, wellness checks and continuous heart rate monitoring that, in our testing experience, don’t feel as polished as other elements of the Coros ecosystem.

“We know most people want to do sports.,” says Wu. “They want to be active and healthy. The philosophy for most companies is trying to get people out to do some activity and that doing that will make them feel good.

“Most of the consumers are athletes or at least very endurance driven. Serious athletes are committed. So we thought about it another way. How do we keep consumers healthy so they can do sports? So it's not that you do sport to be healthy, but you need to be healthy to do sports. This is how we position our wellness system. To support consumers when you don't train and want to stay injury-free or stress-free.”

Huawei Band 11 Pro: One minute review

The Huawei Band 11 Pro sits right between a simple fitness tracker and a full-blown smartwatch. Released in early 2026, it goes beyond the capabilities of the standard Huawei Band 11 by featuring a more sophisticated build and an upgraded set of sensors. In comparison to many of the best fitness trackers, the Band 11 Pro feels more premium than most cheap ones that I've worn, such as the Amazfit Bip 6, but I'm far from convinced about the 'pro' label.

To give it its due, one feature inclusion that sets it apart from budget counterparts is the onboard GPS for tracking outdoor runs, cycles, and hikes, which is reason enough for the higher price tag compared to the likes of the Xiaomi Smart Band 10, which requires users to "piggyback" on a phone's GPS connection.

Despite its core focus being a simple tracker for exercise and health, the watch also includes basic smartwatch features such as notification handling, quick-reply texts, and even a remote camera control. These are handy features that help people feel connected to the world around them, but they're far from deeply integrated due to the lack of a QWERTY keyboard for the text replies, along with non-existent third-party app integration.

In terms of health tracking, Huawei looks to push the boundaries at this price point with Pulse Wave Arrhythmia Analysis for detecting irregular heart rhythms and Sleep Breathing Awareness to monitor for potential issues like sleep apnea. I wouldn't want to rely on these for perfect accuracy, but they're helpful indicators of potential health problems.

Within the broader market of the best smartwatches, the Huawei Band 11 Pro sits in the premium budget sweet spot, directly challenging rivals like the Fitbit Charge 6. While it is considerably more affordable than flagship smartwatches like the Apple Watch or Huawei's own Watch GT series, it provides nearly all the same core health and tracking features, even if they're not quite as accurate.

Huawei Band 11 Pro: Specifications

Huawei Band 11 Pro: Price and availability

• $97 USD / £69.99 UK / $139 AUS
• Very reasonably priced considering the onboard GPS feature
• Stiff competition from Fitbit, Garmin, and Amazfit

At this price, the Huawei Band 11 Pro is an absolute steal. Getting onboard GPS, an AMOLED display, and an aluminum case is almost unheard of at this price. Unfortunately, it’s not available in the US.

Comparable options include the Amazfit Bip 6 ($79.99 US / £79.90 UK) and the Fitbit Charge 6 ($159.99 / £139.99). If you’d like a cheaper alternative and are happy “piggybacking” onto your phone’s GPS, then you could go for the Xiaomi Smart Band 10 ($73.99 / £39.99).

The Band 11 Pro ships with a fluoroelastomer strap in either Black or Isle Blue finishes. If you’d prefer a braided nylon strap, you can have this in Field Green. Whichever strap you choose, the spec of the watch remains the same.

• Value score 4.5/5

Huawei Band 11 Pro: Design

• Large and bright AMOLED display
• Aluminum alloy case, which is a step up from polymer alternatives
• 5 ATM water resistance rating

The Huawei Band 11 Pro is a basic band-style design but with a more premium 'pro' aesthetic than most cheaper trackers. This is most noticeable in the upgraded 1.62-inch AMOLED touchscreen display, which is nearly 30% larger than its predecessor.

As impressive as the size is, it's actually the brightness of it which struck me first. Maxing out at 2,000 nits, it falls short of the much more expensive Apple Watch Ultra 3, but at this price the brightness is excellent; it delivered clear graphics, whether inside in a dark room or outside in full sun. The 347 PPI resolution isn't too shabby either, with text appearing sharp and icons vibrant.

From a build quality perspective, Huawei has opted for a CNC-cut aluminum alloy case which looks and feels markedly more premium than the polymer frames typically found on cheap fitness trackers. This metallic finish is complemented by a slim profile, measuring just 8.99 mm in thickness, allowing the device to sit flush against the wrist. In short, it looks the part, whether you're down the gym, out on a run, or at work.

I tested the version with the breathable fluoroelastomer strap and was surprised how comfortable it was. It’s also easily cleaned when exposed to dirt or sweat. All-day wearability, including at night, is possible due to the 25g weight (with strap), as it’s comfortable and you hardly notice it's there.

To ensure durability, the device carries a 5 ATM water resistance rating, meaning it's waterproof and able to withstand showering, swimming and even water sports.

• Design Score: 4/5

Huawei Band 11 Pro: Features

• Onboard GPS and sleep insights
• Pulse wave arrhythmia analysis
• Sleep insights and emotional wellbeing

The ‘Pro’ label is on account of a number of feature decisions that Huawei has made to elevate the user experience beyond other entry-level alternatives. This begins with built-in GPS (GNSS), which means you can leave your phone at home when going out for a run or cycle and still track your route. It can also detect when you have stopped at a traffic light or for a break and will automatically pause the workout tracking, although like other Huawei watches, you can toggle this feature on or off.

Overnight, it tracks your average sleep HRV, along with heart rate and SpO2, and lets you know when something’s outside your usual range. It also includes Sleep Breathing Awareness, which monitors breathing disruptions during sleep for insights into your nighttime breathing. A basic presentation of your sleep data is provided on the watch, but a more in-depth set of graphs, reports, and advice are viewable in the Huawei Health app.

Next up is 'Pulse Wave Arrhythmia Analysis', which identifies atrial fibrillation (AFib). It utilizes the same optical sensor technology that measures your heart rate, but applies a much higher level of data processing. The best Apple Watches also have an AFib feature, useful for determining whether your heart rate is irregular and whether you need to see a medical professional. If this is an important measurement to you, then I would go with this Huawei rather than a cheaper model.

For users who want help with monitoring their mental health, there's the Emotional Wellbeing Assistant. This provides real-time insights through its comprehensive mood and stress management system. Rather than just showing a "stress score", it uses physiological data to categorize your mood into visual states. These act as quick identifiers of what is going on inside your body.

• Features Score: 4/5

Huawei Band 11 Pro: Performance

• A very easy and enjoyable watch to use
• Sub-par GPS accuracy not surprising at this price point
• Excellent battery performance

As is the case with all Huawei watches, the user experience is a positive one. The Huawei OS interface is clearly laid out with easy-to-understand icons. Moving between features and settings is quick and responsive with little room for confusion about how to navigate around the menus. You can also choose between a list or grid view depending on your preference. The lack of a microphone means there are no voice commands, but that would be a lot to ask at this price.

There are over 100 workouts to choose from with the entire set pre-loaded onto the watch. The order of these, and whether they appear in the quick list, is easily customized. The watch can auto-detect workouts like running, which I made use of a few times when I had forgotten to set things up prior to exercising. As soon as you choose your workout, the watch searches for a GPS signal and alerts you when it’s found. You can begin the workout prior to a GPS lock, but accuracy will be compromised.

I was impressed by how quickly and easily the Band 11 Pro was able to find a GPS signal, even when I was indoors. In terms of GPS accuracy, I ran side-by-side comparisons with the Huawei Watch Ultimate 2, which performed as well as our gold standard, the Apple Watch Ultra series. Unfortunately the Band 11 Pro was left wanting with up to a 10% discrepancy on a range of tracked activities, including runs, walks, and bike rides.

As for health tracking, heart rate and SpO2 were in close range compared to the Watch Ultimate 2. Both watches also reported no abnormalities in relation to the Pulse Wave Arrhythmia Analysis, which was not only great to see from an accuracy point of view but also from a personal health perspective!

When I wore the watch at night, it successfully picked up most of my waking, but not all instances. No surprises there given the low cost of the device and limited complexity of the sensors. Despite its claims to be able to track REM, deep, and light sleep; HRV (Heart Rate Variability), and more, I would take its reports with a pinch of salt. It can give indications and provide general trends, but this isn't medical quality data. The Oura Ring 4, one of the best smart rings, is a wearable sleep-tracking gold standard (or as close as it gets) and is considerably more expensive than this slender band.

The Band 11 Pro excels when it comes to battery performance and is in fact one of its strongest selling points. Despite having a significantly brighter and larger screen than its predecessor, it manages to achieve a maximum of two weeks' use when Always-On Display (AOD) is disabled and GPS tracking is kept to a minimum, worthy of one of the best Garmin watches.

When I turned on continuous heart rate monitoring, performed sleep tracking, and carried out a few workouts per week, the battery stayed alive nearly a week, which is reasonable given that you're not going to be using this type of tracker for long-distance off-grid excursions. I found recharging to be very quick, with 0-100% achieved in a little over an hour.

• Performance score: 4/5

Huawei Band 11 Pro: Scorecard

Huawei Band 11 Pro: Should I buy?

Buy it if...

Don't buy it if...

Also consider

How I tested

I wore the Huawei Band 11 Pro almost non-stop for three weeks. I used it while running, cycling, walking, showering, working out, sleeping, playing with my children, texting, photographing, and daily life. I tested its GPS against the reliable Huawei Watch Ultimate and compared its specs to contemporaries in its price category.

First reviewed: May 2026

Take a read through our Oura Ring 4 review and you'll see there's a lot to like about the smart ring that launched in October 2024: we described it as being "nearly the perfect fitness tracker", while praising its battery life, tracking capabilities, and design.

However, the high score attached to that review — 4.5 stars out of 5 — doesn't mean that the Oura Ring 4 can't be improved upon, and we've got some ideas about the kind of updates that might make the rumored fifth generation model a worthwhile upgrade.

This is an increasingly competitive field as well, with rival devices such as the Samsung Galaxy Ring, another Ultrahuman smart ring and RingConn Gen 3 recently announced, and Apple widely expected to get involved in this product category too, eventually.

That's before we get on to all the other 'focus' screenless fitness trackers that discerning consumers can pick from, including the Google Fitbit Air. The Oura Ring 5 needs to build on what makes the current version such a great device.

Oura Ring 5: leaks and rumors

There's nothing official out there about the Oura Ring 5 yet, but we have an inkling that Oura is working on a new model of its smart ring. We got the company's 3rd-gen device in October 2021 and the 4th-gen wearable in October 2024, so it makes sense that we might see something new later in 2026. The team at Gadgets & Wearables notes that another Oura device has already been registered with US regulators.

While there are only so many ways that a smart ring can be designed, the Oura Ring 5 renders leaked by Android Headlines suggest that not much is going to change in terms of aesthetics — and the 5th-gen ring is apparently going to come with the same charging accessories as well.

What might be different are the colors: the same source predicts that the current Rose Gold color is going to be replaced by Deep Rose. The existing matte black, standard gold, and silver options are expected to be retained, with the silver one apparently going to be available in both a glossy and brushed option.

Other details are rather thin on the ground, though Android Headlines does say that the battery life on the Oura Ring 5 will be more or less the same as on the current model (so around six days, based on our testing). There will be improvements in sensors and health tracking, the report says, though we don't get any details.

More clues about what to expect come from Android Central, which points to patents Oura has registered for modular add-ons, GPS tracking, haptic feedback, and smart gesture support. As always with patents though, they're not always guaranteed to be turned into actual features, even if the company concerned is exploring a certain technology.

It looks as though the Oura Ring 5 will offer an evolution of what we've got with the Oura Ring 4 based on these leaks and rumors, rather than something radically different — though perhaps with some surprises still to come in terms of software, sensors, and fitness tracking capabilities.

Oura Ring 5: what we want to see

At this point it's probably too late in the development of the product to convince the Oura engineers to include features that have or haven't already been locked in, but it's still worth talking about what we'd like to see from the upcoming smart ring — if only to have a list to refer back to when it does arrive.

A slimmer design

You couldn't claim the Oura Ring 4 is bulky, exactly, but there is some room for improvement here, especially when it comes to the larger ceramic version of the wearable. The standard Oura Ring 4 is 2.88 mm thick, while the ceramic version bumps that up to 3.51 mm (and it's heavier too).

The RingConn Gen 2 is a mere 2 mm thick, while the Samsung Galaxy Ring is 2.6 mm, so it's an area where Oura is currently being beaten by its competitors.

Size and weight is so important for a wearable like this, which you're expected to have on around the clock, and Oura might be able to get the new ring fractionally smaller.

A lower price

The starting price for an Oura Ring 4 is $349 / £349 / AU$569, which doesn't compare too badly with the $399 / £399 / AU$699 you pay for the Samsung Galaxy Ring or the $299 / £269 / AU$269 starting price of the Amazfit Helio Ring. However, there's scope for Oura to go cheaper with the Ring 5, especially when you consider the compulsory subscription.

An Oura subscription isn't an optional extra: It's necessary to use your device, and will set you back $5.99 (about £4.40 / AU$8.30) a month. Realistically, Oura isn't going to do away with that steady income stream from its users, but given that commitment, it would be nice to see the up-front price of the next smart ring drop.

A silicon sleeve

The Oura Ring 4 is great for many things, but it's not ideal for activities like racket sports or weight training: the risk of damage to the device or to your own body goes up, whenever you're doing any kind of gripping or holding with your hands, and that's not something you want to have to worry about.

One of the third-party fixes for this, especially when it comes to gym work, is a silicon sleeve to wear over the Oura wearable. If one of these were to be included in the box with the Oura Ring 5, that would save on extra cost for the user (see above), and mean that the device would be more useful right away — without any accessories.

We'll have to wait and see if the team at Oura has been thinking along similar lines since the launch of the Oura Ring 4, but we'll let you know as soon as there's anything official on a new product (a product that's very likely to break into our best smart rings list).

• A big update is rolling out for Coros watches
• The headline feature is voice commands, currently in beta
• Strength training, auto laps for running, and the control center all get tweaks, along with a new photo sharing feature

Coros users are getting a lovely package of new features and other updates, starting today. Coros' May Feature Update gives Coros users, especially modern ones, a host of new features to play with, chief among them Voice Control.

Currently available only in beta, this moves Coros watches (at least, those equipped with microphones such as the Coros Pace 4 and Apex 4) to match some of the other best running watches such as the Apple Watch Ultra series, along with the best Garmin watches.

Voice Control can be used to start a workout profile on the watch, whether it's walking, trail running or even gravel biking, by pressing and holding the action button. You can also make more granular changes within those profiles, such as changing lanes during track runs, or changing the treadmill speed on a treadmill run profile. You can even 'record a catch' while fishing.

It can also be used for the usual assortment of settting reminders, activating Find My Phone, and so on. If you want to get early access to the feature, you can join the beta program here.

Our writer Michael Sawh recently interviewed Coros' CEO Lewis Wu, and while we'll be publishing the second half of that interview next week, we can reveal that the move towards voice commands is very much in line with Wu's AI-powered vision for Coros.

He said: "We believe voice is the future... "If you want to get future-proof hardware or a running watch for yourself, consider those with a microphone. This is our vision.” You can read all about Coros' AI plans in the second part of the interview, to be published next week.

What else is new?

Other updates include Custom Photo Sharing, which allow you to overlay your stats and recent training sessions with a photo of your choice before sharing it with friends or to social media. It creates a vertical overlay with stats such as speed or elevation — perfect for sharing to Instagram or Strava.

Strength Mode has received an update, allowing users to edit reps and intensity either on the watch or in the app after the session, and rep counting accuracy is reportedly improved as well.

You can now choose to set up Auto Laps when running by distance, or by position, so you can return to where you started to begin another lap. This is perfect for circular runs or hill sprints. The Control Center will also receive an update, with a new easy-access layout.

The update is available from today.

Keen to get started on your running journey? Well, you're in luck. Garmin has dropped three new contenders for our best Garmin watch list, and they're all affordably priced and brimming with running-focused features.

The Garmin Forerunner 70, 170 and 170 Music officially release on May 15. You might have pre-ordered one already, but if you're still looking, you also might be weighing up which model is right for you. Do you need the Forerunner 170 Music, or can you save money and opt for the cheaper Garmin Forerunner 70? I break down all the differences below, with a brief bit of context to explain how they compare to other Garmin watches in the range.

Note that I haven't yet had an opportunity to test the watches myself — I've looked at the statistics and feature lists from Garmin's official websites and promotional materials to put together this comparison.

Garmin Forerunner 70 vs Garmin Forerunner 170: Specifications

Garmin Forerunner 70 vs Garmin Forerunner 170: Price

The cheapest watch of the three is the Garmin Forerunner 70, replacing the aging Garmin Forerunner 55 as Garmin's entry-level running watch du jour.

As you can see in our table above, it costs $249.99 / £219.99 / AU$399, while the more feature-rich Forerunner 170 (which replaces the older Garmin Forerunner 165) starts at $299 / £259.99 / AU$479. If you want the Music capabilities, you can pay an extra $50 / £40 / AU$70 for the Forerunner 170 Music.

Garmin Forerunner 70 vs Garmin Forerunner 170: Design

All three watches have a similar design language, and there are few physical differences. There's a single gram of difference in weight between the Garmin Forerunner 70 and its 170 siblings, and all three are only available in a 42.6mm screen size.

They all have the same 1.2-inch AMOLED touchscreen display, and use the same five-button configuration as many of Garmin's other watches, such as the Garmin Fenix 8, which makes it easy to operate the watch even while wearing gloves — perfect for running in all weathers.

Embossed Forerunner logos adorn the bands for all three models, while all three are available in a variety of colors, including Black, Whitestone and two-tone models. Each has at least one unique color option too — the Forerunner 70, for example, is available in a pale-yellow Citron color.

Garmin Forerunner 70 vs Garmin Forerunner 170: Features

Here's where it gets interesting. Each watch has the usual suite of heart rate and fitness-tracking features, such as calories burned, sleep tracking, steps counted and 80 sports profiles. They also all have built-in GPS, Glonass and Galileo satellite network connectivity, to make sure the watch is accurately tracking your runs.

Each one offers Daily Suggested Workouts and personalized training plans via Garmin Coach, the service in the Garmin Connect app. Other training features include advanced metrics perfect for runners such as stride, cadence and elevation, along with Running Power — a metric you may not know about. It's a measure of how much power your body's putting out during a run, measured in mechanical watts.

Garmin works out running power using the watch's motion sensors, GPS and barometer. Using heart rate to determine your performance is considered inferior, because it measures your body's response to the run, not the power of the run itself.

All three watches have wellness features galore, such as sleep tracking, nap detection, Training Readiness and Recovery scores to better plan your training calendar around. Course Planner helps you train at the correct distances, creating routes around your neighborhood, and the Race Predictor feature estimates your time based on a course added to Garmin's database and your historic data.

There are some differences, but they aren't major. The Forerunner 170 appears to have all the training features of the 70, while adding Garmin Pay and Smart Notifications features. Smart Notifications allows you to reply to texts when you're on the move (on Android phones), manage notifications from apps and emails, and screen calls, while Garmin Pay is a virtual wallet on your wrist, and works in a similar way to Apple Pay on one of the best Apple Watches.

These appear to be the only differences, aside from the colorways, between those two watches.

The Forerunner 170 Music adds 4GB of internal memory, allowing you to store songs on your wrist. When connected to Bluetooth headphones, you can listen to music right from your watch, without using your phone as a go-between. Combined with Garmin Pay, this means you can leave your phone at home or in a bag, run while listening to music, and even buy a coffee once you're finished.

Early verdict

The Garmin Forerunner 70 is shaping up to be a pretty great training tool, and if you're not looking for a smartwatch to use for notifications and a digital wallet, this is the model for you.

If you are looking for those things, the Garmin Forerunner 170 or 170 Music is going to be the best choice for you, unless you want to go up in price and opt for a more expensive smartwatch like the Garmin Venu 4.

Last week, Google launched the Google Fitbit Air, its much-rumored screenless fitness tracker designed to be its entry into the set-and-forget 'focus wearable' market. I should say re-entry really, as the original Fitbit and Fitbit Flex bands were exactly this type of device: minimalist pucks or bands, with very limited scope for interaction, and no screens to speak of.

Right now the category of simple, screenless wearables is dominated by the likes of the best smart rings and by fitness trackers such as Whoop, which is undoubtedly the most popular of the wrist-based screenless fitness bands out there. Whoop has been in the screenless tracker game for years, and is a popular choice for serious athletes, biohackers and wellness enthusiasts alike.

But Whoop's offering isn't cheap, as you don't buy the device outright; instead you get it as part of an annual subscription to the Whoop app, with the subscription tiers increasing in price as more features are included.

While I haven't yet had any hands-on time with the Google Fitbit Air (I'm expecting a review unit very soon), we can compare the listed specs, features and subscription prices to identify which fitness tracker is right for you.

Google Fitbit Air vs Whoop: Specifications

Above is a table comparing some of the specifications of the Google Fitbit Air to the Whoop 5.0 and premium Whoop MG bands. Perhaps a good place to start here is the weight, as Google states that the Fitbit Air weighs just 12 grams with a band or five grams on its own, hence the name. The Whoop devices weigh more than double that. The Fitbit is also far better for diving, as according to Google it's water resistant up to 50 meters.

The Google Fitbit Air can last for a week, while the Whoops offer only a few days of battery life each. However, they do come with a battery pack that can slot onto the device while you wear it to charge the device, which means you can get 14 days of constant data with no need to take the device off to charge it at all. In theory, the only time you'd ever need to take your Whoop off is to change the band, should you want to.

As more expensive devices, the Whoops incorporate stainless steel into their clasps, whereas the Fitbit is all plastic.

Google Fitbit Air vs Whoop: Price & value

Where Google wins off the bat is that the Fitbit Air is relatively cheap — you can pre-order it now for $99.99 / £84.99 / AU$199. Even if you choose not to subscribe to Google Health Premium —Google's fitness service, which gives you access to its comprehensive AI Health Coach feature — after the free trial included with your Fitbit Air is over, you can still log your data using the band on the Google Health app's free tier and use it as a basic, screenless fitness tracker.

If you do choose to subscribe, you're essentially paying for the tracker again on an annual basis in order to get all the AI features and unlock advice to help you use those metrics. There's no doubt this is intended to be a core feature rather than an optional extra, but you do have the option not to subscribe. You could also pay monthly, but you end up paying around $20 US dollars more per year than an annual subscription (international pricing is TBC).

Whoop, on the other hand, requires a subscription to work at all, starting at a fairly reasonable £169 / $199 / AU$299 per year for the base Whoop One subscription, which comes with the Whoop 5.0 device but locks metrics like Stress and Whoop Age behind a paywall.

You get those (along with a nicer Whoop MG band and a wireless charger puck) with a Whoop Peak membership, which costs £229 / $239 / AU$419 per year. Then at the highest level you get the Whoop Life subscription plan, at £349 / $359 / AU$629 per year, which comes with the Whoop MG band and heart health features.

There's no doubt about it: over time, the Whoop will be pricier than the Google Fitbit Air by a significant margin. While the Google Fitbit Air is the cheaper option of the two, the breadth of the AI Coach's features might make it a better value prospect too, unless you want specific features like Whoop's Stress score, workout builder or the MG's electrocardiogram (ECG) functionality.

Google Fitbit Air vs Whoop: Features

The Fitbit Air, Whoop 5.0 and Whoop MG all pack PPG LED heart rate sensors, and all the best smartwatch features such as heart rate, step counting, calorie burn estimation, skin temperature and blood oxygen monitoring. I haven't tested the accuracy of Fitbit's sensor yet.

The key difference between the two Whoops, however, is that the Whoop MG has an advanced 'Heart Screener' sensor functionality which can be used for ECG scans, which can aid in detecting atrial fibrillation or irregular heart rate. According to Whoop, it "meets and exceeds clinical-accuracy standards".

The Fitbit Air doesn't have this functionality, but the Fitbit Charge 6 does — so if you're looking to keep an eye on your heart health, you'll need to opt for the Charge series or a more expensive Whoop MG.

The Google Fitbit Air's feature set includes a lot of the same stuff from the Fitbit app, including historic graphs of your movement and sleep data along with a Daily Readiness score, but many of the actionable insights are locked behind the Google Health Coach, the AI coaching service that comes with a Google Health Premium subscription. The Coach shows you demonstrations for different exercises, advises you on how to get better sleep, can generate meal and exercise plans, and can incorporate medical records.

Whoop also has an extensive laundry list of features to rival this. In terms of the amount of features on offer, it exceeds Google's, with all manner of scores for metrics like strain, recovery, sleep (along with actionable insights on how to reduce sleep need), Whoop Age (your body's biological age, only accessible if you subscribe to the mid-tier Peak subscription or the Life subscription), Cardiovascular Age, and lots more.

Whoop's AI coach offers useful, actionable insights too, and its workout builder is based on a comprehensive library of fitness moves that also includes demonstrations. While Google allows you to upload your medical records to the app, serious biohackers can send away for blood tests in the US via the Whoop app, to get results for biomarkers such as hormone levels and vitamin deficiencies that Whoop's AI can incorporate. New features are rolling out that will also allow you to contact licensed clinicians through the app.

However, despite Whoop having a longer list of features, I'm looking forward to spending time with Google's health-focused LLM Coach to identify the breadth of its capabilities. I'm willing to bet that the flexibility of the Coach service, together with the ability to feed it your data, will make it an excellent value proposition.

Early verdict

The Google Fitbit Air is a fairly cheap tracker that looks like a great-value proposition for those who don't want to shell out for a pricey Whoop subscription, especially as over time, it looks like the expense of a Whoop will only increase when compared to the Fitbit's cheaper subscription and one-time purchase. As a consumer, you also have the choice of whether to subscribe to the AI coach or just use the device as a tracker.

The Whoop devices do have some innovations that Fitbit doesn't have, such as that innovative charger, the metallic physical elements and a more comprehensive feature set, but during testing I'll be specifically testing the breadth of the Fitbit's AI coach, trying to see if it can replicate some of the Whoop bands' best features.

• The RingConn Gen3 is now available for pre-order
• It boasts new features including 'Vascular Health Insights, blood pressure and vibration alerts
• At present, vibration alerts are only keyed to health events and reminders, rather than phone notifications

The RingConn Gen 3 is now available for pre-order, and it boasts a range of upgrades and improvements over the RingConn Gen 2. Our reviewer called the slimmer RingConn Gen 2 Air the "perfect entry-level smart ring" and it made our best smart rings list. Clearly RingConn is already doing something right.

While the new model is slightly thicker, it's got a bunch of new features, notably Vascular Health Insights and Smart Vibration Alerts. Vascular Health Insights is RingConn's name for looking at your data longer-term, with the feature said to 'push the ring beyond simple logging and more toward long-term pattern interpretation,' according to the RingConn website. It's 'designed to help users understand broader cardiovascular trends over time'.

RingConn stresses it's turning heart health signals into actionable insight, but at the moment it's unclear how that differs to similar features from Oura and Samsung Health.

Blood pressure monitoring is also on the cards, although RingConn is carefully not framing the ring as a replacement for a blood pressure cuff, as is the case with the best Apple Watches' Hypertension feature. Instead, it's designed as advisory or an estimate only.

Haptic feedback

RingConn's Smart Vibration Alerts are interesting: it's a feature not currently used by the top smart rings like the Oura Ring 4 and the Samsung Galaxy Ring. Instead, it represents smart rings adopting an element of interactivity rather than remaining focused, quiet wearables for data collection.

However, rather than get into alerting you to phone notifications, the RingConn Gen 3's Smart Vibration Alerts are only for health events, with the press release stating that 'Gen 3 is not trying to become a noisy mini-smartwatch'.

'The vibration feature is health-first, not message-first. That keeps the ring aligned with what people actually want from this category: helpful guidance without constant distraction.' Presumably, those health events include features similar to the best smartwatches, alerting the user to unusually high or low heart rates. The vibration feature can be toggled on or off.

A solid foundation

The RingConn Gen 3 builds on the Gen 2's solid foundation, with sleep apnea detection, menstrual cycle tracking, and an improved battery life (up to 11 days with vibration on, or 14 with vibration off).

It packs all the usual measuring of wellness metrics such as stress, heart rate variability, blood oxygen, sleep tracking, steps, calories and more. Stay tuned for our full review, and you can preorder the RingConn Gen 3 here for $386 (around £285 / AU$535).

• Garmin just dropped three new watches: the Garmin Forerunner 70, 170 and 170 Music
• Designed to be 'easy to use', the watches are equipped 'with everything a runner needs to start their running journey'
• Some of Garmin's software from more expensive Forerunners makes the cut here, such as wrist-based running power and running dynamics

Our best Garmin watches list has been overdue getting a new budget entry for a while, and we're now spoiled for choice: Garmin just dropped three 'easy-to-use' running watches.

The three models — the Garmin Forerunner 70, Forerunner 170 and 170 Music — are equipped with "everything a runner needs to start their running journey," according to Susan Lyman, Garmin Vice President of Consumer Sales and Marketing.

The Garmin Forerunner 70 is the successor to Garmin's long-serving Garmin Forerunner 55 running watch, and will cost £219.99 / AU$399 (around $300). The Forerunner 170, meanwhile, will start at £259.99 / AU$479 (around $350). The 170 Music, which allows you to download music and connect headphones and which comes with 4GB of memory, costs £299.99 / AU$549 (around $400).

All three watches come with a 1.2-inch AMOLED screen and Garmin's standard Forerunner five-button configuration.

The Garmin Forerunner 70 offers up to 13 days of battery life, while the more feature-rich Forerunner 170 series both get up to 10 days of battery life in smartwatch mode. The Forerunner 170 series also adds more smartwatch features, such as Garmin Pay.

In a press release, Lyman said the "Forerunner 70 and Forerunner 170 include premium running and training features pulled in from our more advanced Forerunners, plus popular health and wellness metrics."

Those tools include Training Readiness scores, wrist-based Running Power (a popular metric to base your performance on, a measure of total effort rather than heart rate), and Running Dynamics features, which calculate stride, cadence and more. It's not clear yet whether the watches are packing the older, less accurate Elevate V4 heart rate sensors common in cheaper watches, or Garmin's newer Elevate V5 series.

The Garmin Forerunner 70 and 170 series are available to pre-order now, releasing on May 15.

A well-timed replacement

While there's plenty of entry-level and beginner-friendly language used when describing these watches, Garmin's simpler, cheaper Forerunners are still used by the best runners in the world.

As recently as April this year, the five-year-old, still-cheap Garmin Forerunner 55 was used by marathon runner Sebastian Sawe to break the two-hour time barrier at London 2026.

So, even though these watches are ideal for beginners, serious runners should be looking at them very closely too. Stay tuned for our full reviews.

My running pace isn't going to set the race world alight. And while I'm a big proponent of taking things at your own speed, I would like to improve my stats just a smidge — and a fitness tracker is how I'm going to do that. So far, I've either not tracked my runs at all, or used a phone-based app to gather information that I can look at after I've finished. Some on-wrist information, I think, would help me become more aware of my progress, and ultimately, how to improve it.

So I'm in the market for a wearable. Today's best fitness trackers and smart watches are crammed with tech and data, but I don't need something particularly advanced, and I also don't want to splash too much cash. If you're in a similar position to me, I've gathered some top options below. These are highest-rated, budget running trackers we've tested at TechRadar, any of which would fit the bill perfectly.

In the affordable smartwatch arena, the standout is the Amazfit Active 2, which is bafflingly cheap and earned a perfect five stars in our review. Of the fitness bands we've tested, the Samsung Galaxy Fit3 is the shining star (provided you don't live in the US or have an iPhone), or the efficient and beginner-friendly FitBit Inspire 3.

Read on for more options — and hit the View Details button to find out more information about each one.

On your marks...

• Google has revealed the new Google Fitbit Air, and as expected, it's a screenless fitness tracker similar to a Whoop band
• Designed as a 'set and forget' wearable just like the original FitBit, it weighs just 12g with the fabric band
• The wearable arrives at the same time as a big Fitbit redesign, with the app rebranded as 'Google Health'

After weeks of rumors and teases by Google (via NBA all-star Stephen Curry's Instagram account) Google has revealed the Google Fitbit Air, the next evolution of the best Fitbits, and it's exactly what we were expecting: a budget screenless 'set and forget' fitness tracker to undercut the likes of Whoop.

Priced at $99.99 / AU$199 (around £75), the tracker is incredibly lightweight at just 12g — without the band, it weighs only 5g.

It boasts a seven-day battery life, fast charging, and all the usual smartwatch sensor arrays for heart rate, step counting, calorie burn estimation, skin temperature and blood oxygen monitoring.

The device doesn't have GPS, differentiating it from the Fitbit Charge 6. It includes a subscription with three free months of Google Health Premium (formerly known as Fitbit Premium, but more on that in a minute), usually costing $9.99 / £7.99 / AU$15.49 per month.

So far, so expected. The Google Fitbit Air saves seven days of detailed motion data, minute by minute, and one day of workout data, syncing to the new Google Health app.

What is the Google Health app?

The Fitbit app and Fitbit Premium subscription service are being rebranded as the Google Health app in a mandatory rollout, which includes a sweeping redesign. It's not going to be a popular move for long-time Fitbit users, but we've known this was coming ever since Google made it mandatory to have a Google account to continue using Fitbit devices.

As part of this, Google Health's premium subscription is now based around the Google Health Coach, an AI health assistant based on Google Gemini. The Coach accesses all the data you allow it, from sleep and heart rate from a fitness tracker, to nutrition logging by uploading photos of your meals. It can even take into account your medical records.

Using this corpus of information, the Google Health Coach becomes a personal assistant of sorts, recommending you workout plans, sleep optimization tips, recipes, injury advice and more based on your goals and health.

The Google Fitbit Air was apparently 'designed for Google Health Coach', but unlike Whoop, you can use the fitness tracker with a free version of the app if you don't want to subscribe. You just don't get all the AI-powered advice, instead simply getting readouts, scores and graphs based on your data as you do with most fitness trackers.

Google Fitbit Air: specifications

The bands come in several styles: a woven Performance Loop Band designed for 'a flexible fit' built from recycled materials; a silicon Active Band; and the more stylish Elevated Modern Band. The Google Fitbit Air Special Edition comes with a Stephen Curry branded band designed for "peak performance and elevated style".

Analysis: undercutting Whoop and returning to classic Fitbit

When news first broke about the upcoming Fitbit Air, I wrote that Fitbit's new screenless Whoop-style tracker is a better fit for the brand than a smartwatch, because it's a return to the 'almost invisible' pedometer of 2008.

I stand by that assessment. Fitbit's always been best as an unobtrusive, reliable fitness tracker and pedometer, and despite the new app's AI smarts and Google's heavy hints that you need the Health Coach subscription to get the most from this band, this is exactly where the Google Fitbit Air sits.

Other screenless options, such as Whoop 5.0, the Polar Loop and even smart rings like the Oura Ring 4 are more expensive, making the Google Fitbit Air a cheap option for 'focus wearable' fanciers.

Vote in our Google Health poll and tell us what you think:

In 2025, both Garmin and Polar made the bold move to launch paid subscription services with AI-driven coaching features, putting a host of software features behind a paywall.

Unsurprisingly, the introduction of Garmin’s Connect+ and, to a lesser extent, Polar’s Fitness Program didn’t go down well with many existing users. In particular, Garmin users that had just spent a lot of money on a watch they assumed they’d have access to everything on offer, with few users migrating to the paid tier according to our poll.

Garmin and Polar join Oura, Whoop, Google and most other major wearables manufacturers and fitness apps in offering a paid tier full of AI-powered features. When two of the most established sports watch brands make those kinds of moves, it’s understandable to wonder if everyone else will follow suit.

Coros is a relative newcomer to this space, launching its first watch in 2018. Since then, it’s rapidly grown its presence to appear on the wrists of many runners, cyclists and endurance athletes, and features on our lists of best running watches. Coros’ companion app and features have been free to access with the purchase of a watch, and have been since day one. So would it follow in the footsteps of Garmin and others by starting to make its users pay up for extra features?

“First of all, never say never,” says Lewis Wu, co-founder and CEO at Coros.”It really depends on how things go. “We don’t have a payment subscription plan on the roadmap yet, because so far the development is good enough for us to eat that cost.

“Hopefully we’ll never need to do it. The cost of cloud services and the cost of AI will also go down in the future. So we’ll try very hard to keep it for free. We'll try to be as nice as possible for a long time!”

Wu was speaking to us at the launch of a new collaboration between Coros and Wahoo that now allows training data to be shared across devices from both brands. That includes Wahoo’s new Kickr Run treadmill to boost indoor run tracking accuracy. Again, there is no extra charge for this feature for Coros or Wahoo users.

“One thing we need to look at is, what kind of features are we going to build?,” Wu said. “The second thing is, what’s the cost of that feature? If the profit from hardware sales is able to cover it, then we’ll find a way to offer it for free. We have been building features for existing hardware for years without charging anything.”

As far as the likes of Garmin and Polar deciding to offer a subscription element to their respective software platforms, this is something Wu isn’t wholly surprised by.

“A company needs to make a profit. That’s one thing, says Wu. “That’s part of why you start a company right? Whether you’re a large company or a small startup. We want to keep our business model simple. We want to sell hardware and reinvest the profit into the back end development.

“There’s no problem for an app-only company to charge a subscription because that’s their only source of income. We’re fortunate that we have the hardware sales to support us.”

Is a screenless Coros tracker on the horizon?

Locking software features behind a paywall isn’t the only trend in the wearable space that has pulled in some of those established sports watch brands. In 2025, Polar introduced the Loop, a screen-less band clearly set on offering a subscription-free alternative to Whoop. Garmin is expected to launch its Cirqa band soon and do something similar. Google and Fitbit is set to join the screen-free party with the device likely being dubbed Fitbit Air. So is Coros cooking up something screen-free as well?

“Screen-less devices really land on understanding what kind of problem we want to solve for consumers?” explains Wu. “We’re not a company that sells tons of screen-less devices and makes tons of money from it. What we’re going to do is look at what kind of problems cannot be solved by a watch. For the most part, most problems can be solved by a watch. It’s a device you can wear 24/7. It can record your heart rate and metrics like HRV.”

This kind of problem solving is what led Coros to build and launch an arm-based heart rate monitor. To solve the problem of offering more reliable heart rate tracking across workouts compared to the performance of doing that from the wrist. It also launched the Coros Pod to provide more accurate tracking of running metrics like pace by placing motion sensors closer to your feet.

“We build a watch now and our first step is to build a very established wellness system,” explains Wu. “We’ll see if consumers are happy about it, or if it is absolutely necessary to build hardware. You look at the smart ring companies. They offer a good experience, right? Whatever decision we’re going to make, it’s going to be about solving a problem. It’s not just about another source of income because fundamentally, there's not that pressure.”

So it’s a no to a Whoop rival for now at least and crucially for Coros users, no plans to hit that subscription button any time soon as long as those watches keep shipping.

Huawei Watch GT Runner 2: One minute review

The Huawei Watch GT Runner 2 is full of innovative tweaks, making it ideal for running accuracy, and from a design perspective, it’s the best running watch I’ve tried so far in 2026. Because US customers can’t actually buy them, Huawei devices often go under the radar in many lists, which is a shame, as their hardware is stellar.

The GT Runner 2 is another smash hit. It’s light, at 10.7mm thick and just 34.5g in weight, packing a smallish 1.32-inch screen with a 3,000 nit brightness AMOLED display. That’s as bright as the Apple Watch Ultra 3. It fits nicely on my average-sized male wrist and doesn’t move about during runs. It comes in a selection of pretty cool colors and bands. I was partial to the Dawn Orange colorway, but my review unit arrived in Dusk Blue, which also looks nice.

The GPS credentials are where things get interesting. Huawei claims the GT Runner 2 outperforms the Garmin Forerunner 970 (by name) in GPS accuracy for runners, using a new dual-floating GPS antenna structure to improve accuracy. I didn’t have a Garmin Forerunner 970 to hand, but I did have something even better: the Garmin Fenix 8 Pro, perhaps Garmin’s best-ever smartwatch from a hardware perspective, and one that costs three times as much as the GT Runner 2.

On a 10.5 kilometer out-and-back run, the Fenix 8 Pro recorded 10.51km, with 797 calories burned, an average heart rate of 157 bpm, 5.39km average pace. The Huawei GT Runner 2 recorded 10.48km, a difference of 0.03km (or 30 meters) overall, with 785 calories burned, an average heart rate of 167 bpm, and 5.39km average pace. Those are very close results.

Even advanced running metrics were similar, with stride length being recorded as 1.10 meters by both watches. With very little in the way of statistically significant differences, I’m happy that the GT Runner 2 is as accurate as the very top-tier watches in the category. I’d expect nothing less from a watch used by record-breaking marathoner Eliud Kipchoge. You can see the results on the screens below.

Other wellness metrics are good, too: I’ve hyped up Huawei’s TruSense and TruSleep algorithms before as being scarily accurate, and it’s good to see the watch making use of both here. The accuracy of its sleep tracking and the watch's reduced weight made it easy to wear overnight. Marathon Mode, a little like Garmin’s Event Planner with an intelligent coach, and training plans abound on-watch, allowing you to follow programs imported from the Huawei Health app. Battery life is impressive, while features like Emotional Wellbeing that rely on self-reporting, I consider less useful.

A resounding success for design, performance, and health and fitness features, but smart stuff is more of a mixed bag, albeit through no fault of the watch’s designers. Huawei’s inability to work with either Google or Android’s ecosystem left my watch as a self-contained wellness tool rather than an integrated smart gadget in the same way the best Android watches, or best Apple Watches, are.

Huawei says the watch “runs seamlessly with iOS and Android,” but that’s not entirely true. I could see WhatsApp notifications as part of Huawei’s Message Tool, but everything has to be side-loaded from Huawei’s online AppGallery, so I couldn’t get a native WhatsApp watch app, only notifications. There’s no first-party app for Spotify either, so I had to download Petal Maps on my phone to use instead of Google or Apple Maps. As an extension of my phone, this experience is still frustrating and far from reflective of its excellent wellness credentials.

Huawei Watch GT Runner 2: Specifications

Huawei Watch GT Runner 2: Price and availability

• £349.99 in the UK / Europe
• Not available in US / AU
• Cheaper than most modern Forerunner watches

Huawei’s availability is a far greater issue than its price. Huawei telecomms devices continue to suffer from the ongoing 5G ban, which is a shame for US runners as they’re missing out on some very good hardware. For UK users, the price is pretty reasonable at £349.99, around the same price as the Apple Watch Series 11.

• Value score: 4/5

Huawei Watch GT Runner 2: Scorecard

Huawei Watch GT Runner 2: Should I buy?

Buy it if...

Don't buy it if...

Also consider

How I tested

I wore the Huawei Watch GT Runner 2 for a week, taking it on several runs as well as gym sessions, sleeping with it, and draining the battery down. I tested it on a 10.5 km run against the Garmin Fenix 8 Pro to determine accuracy in its metrics.

First reviewed: April 2026

• More details of the Fitbit Air have leaked
• It could launch on May 16 for $99
• Images of the wearable have already appeared

The rumors are that Google is about to launch a Whoop-rivalling, screen-free tracker called the Fitbit Air, and we have some fresh leaks around the device that point to a possible price point and three different color options.

This information comes from Droid Life, and suggests that the tracker price will come in at $99 in the US. That's roughly £73 / AU$138, though Google is unlikely to use a straight currency conversion — something like £99 would be more likely in the UK, where I am.

As for colors, there will apparently be three main options: Obsidian, Lavender, and Berry. They neatly match the colors we've seen on previous Google devices, including the recently launched Google Pixel 10a, adding more credibility to the leaks.

Those main colors are said to be accompanied by a Snow (or white) charging cable, plus a variety of band options — Performance, Active, Elevated, and Metal Mesh. More colors will reportedly be available with the bands, beyond the three mentioned above, including Fog, Moonstone (see also the Google Pixel 10 Pro), Porcelain, Silver, and Warm Gold.

The price is right?

Now the Whoop bands that Google is taking aim at here don't cost anything, but are attached to compulsory subscriptions that start at $149 for the first year, rising to $199 after that — so it's a substantial investment.

It remains to be seen if the Fitbit Air will require a subscription, but Fitbit Premium currently costs $9.99 a month or $79.99 a year. All of the current Fitbit and Google wearables can be used with or without the subscription and extra features.

As well as the leaks about the hardware, there have also been whisperings that Fitbit Premium will be rebranded as Google Health, which may come with new features of its own. Droid Life says May 16 will be the launch date, so we don't have long to wait.

Having been holding on tightly to my Fitbit Charge 6 for three years now, the Fitbit Air is perfectly suited for me — not only am I due an upgrade, I've never really seen the point of a display on a fitness tracker anyway.

I need something light and unobtrusive that I can wear around the clock (unlike my bulkier smartwatch), and this may well fit the bill.

• More leaks about the new Fitbit tracker have hit the web from 'sources familiar with the matter' via 9to5Google
• The screenless band is reportedly being referred to as the Fitbit Air
• Fitbit Premium is also reportedly being rebranded as "Google Health"

More news abounds about the upcoming screenless Fitbit fitness tracker, as teased by Steph Curry on Instagram. This time, we've got a bit more unconfirmed information on the name of the tracker, alongside a revamp of Google's Fitbit Premium subscription service.

According to 9to5Google, which cites unnamed 'sources familiar with the matter', the new Fitbit is named the Fitbit Air. Fitbit has used this moniker before with the Fitbit Aria Air (which featured on our list of best smart scales for a while) but never on a fitness tracker.

The name does make some sense: like a MacBook Air or the Ultrahuman Ring Air, it's likely to be billed as a super-light version of the base device, in this case one of the best Fitbits. It'll be all the lighter for not needed a screen or similar element of interactivity, instead cleaving closer to the pedometer Fitbits of yore.

However, just like Whoop (the current screenless fitness tracker leader), the device will interact with a paid subscription service, in this case Fitbit Premium. Except, it might not be called Fitbit Premium anymore — 9to5Google's sources state the subscription may be rebranding itself as Google Health.

Google continues its Fitbit erasure mission

After Google bought Fitbit in 2019, using the popular brand's Fitbit ecosystem to replace its middling Google Fit app, it began quietly axing models and features from its line that it saw as redundant. These include community challenges and, er, almost all smartwatch models, folding the best stuff into its own Google Pixel Watch line.

Fitbit Premium is an outstanding fitness service — our reviewer gave Fitbit Premium 4.5 stars in our review — and changing the name to Google Health wouldn't necessarily change any of the service's content or functionality, just the branding. But it would go a step towards eliminating the name of Fitbit from Google's ecosystem, strengthening its own brand.

I assume if the rumors are true and the move is successful, Google Health will be incorporated into other Google devices and services, allowing the company to remain consistent, while Fitbits will be reduced to the name of that particular line of trackers. Having 'Fitbit, powered by Google' on a Google Pixel Watch could be complicated messaging for smartwatch buyers who don't know Fitbit and Google are one and the same. If the rumors are true, Google Pixel phones and watches just arrive with Google Health and everyone will know what's up.

Whether any more features will be axed to the ire of existing Fitbit subscribers, only time will tell.

• Whoop is rolling out a new version of its Advanced Labs blood-testing program, Specialized Panels
• The program now tests up to 89 biomarkers
• Once tested, you get the results in-app, and Whoop’s AI can use it to provide better health insights

For a while now, Whoop members in the US have had the option to pay an additional fee on top of their annual subscription for Whoop’s Advanced Labs feature.

Whether you’ve got a Whoop 5.0, a Whoop MG or an old-school Whoop 4.0, you can head to the nearest lab of Whoop's testing partner, Quest Diagnostics, get a blood test for up to 59 biomarkers, and see the results in the Whoop app. Whoop can then add this data to its smorgasbord of collected sleep, heart rate, training and recovery data to provide more personalized health insights.

Whoop has now revealed the next stage of this program, Specialized Panels. For a one-time fee of $299, users can get a blood test drawn with Quest Diagnostics providing between 75 and 89 biomarkers spread across one of five ‘panels’: heart health, performance, metabolic function, women’s health and men’s health.

Just like Advanced Labs, the blood test provides information on cardiometabolic risks, vitamin deficiencies, hormones and so on. That information gets turned into "clear, actionable insights", as Whoop’s in-app AI can grab the info and use it in conjunction with all the other data your Whoop band collects. However, these Specialized Panels allow users to drill down on areas of particular concern. Whoop says "this marks a shift from broad, comprehensive testing toward more focused, goal-based insights".

Whoop is one of only a handful of health tech companies that have started incorporating blood tests. Oura, maker of the best smart rings, has a Health Panels feature covering 50 biomarkers which costs $99.

Blood testing and big tech: is there anything to worry about?

Blood tests can show all sorts of things, from levels of the stress hormone cortisol, to testosterone or estrogen levels, to hemoglobin, which helps transport oxygen to your muscles and brain. Low hemoglobin levels, for example, can cause tiredness because not enough oxygen is getting to the body parts that need it, and Whoop will factor this in when analyzing your stress, strain and recovery times.

It’s all very clever, but there’s a hidden worry to this: handing your blood over to big tech, and what companies might do with your sensitive health information.

Whoop’s Head of Healthcare Product, Alex Vannoi, told me via email that: “Specialized Panels are built on the same rigorous foundation as the rest of our platform. We use end-to-end encryption, strict access controls, and continuous monitoring to safeguard data, and only collect what’s necessary to deliver the service.

“When we work with trusted clinical partners, information is shared in a highly controlled way and used solely for its intended purpose.” Whoop also doesn’t train its AI on personally identifiable data.

Whoop works with Quest Diagnostics to draw the blood necessary to deliver these biomarkers. Quest Diagnostics’ privacy policy states that when it collects personal information such as “precise or specific geolocation, information concerning your health, and genetic information”, that info could be passed on to third parties such as “service providers, analytics, marketing, and promotional partners, and third parties for operational purposes.”

Could your blood be used for advertising? It all sounds very Cyberpunk. While blood test results could be considered ‘protected health information’ under US law (specifically the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPAA), the sharing process between Whoop and Quest Diagnostics, outside of a clinical setting, makes it a grayer area. Certainly Whoop seems to treat your data responsibly, but do its partners?

UPDATE: 04/16/2026

I reached out to Quest Diagnostics to ask whether Whoop user’s data could be shared with third parties for marketing purposes.

A representative for Quest Diagnostics told me that "Quest Diagnostics is a HIPAA-covered entity that performs the lab testing that WHOOP users initiate through the WHOOP application. Quest Diagnostics uses and discloses test results only in accordance with HIPAA. HIPAA restricts the use of test results for marketing and we comply with those restrictions.

"Quest Diagnostics only shares test results as permitted by HIPAA or as authorized by the patient".

• An unreleased Fitbit wearable has been spotted in the wild
• It’s been repeatedly worn in public by basketball player Steph Curry
• The device was previously teased by Curry and Google

Not everyone that’s interested in fitness trackers wants a wearable with a screen. After all, these products might be some of the best smartwatches out there, but with a high-end display thrown into the mix, they can be too bulky, too expensive, and too short on battery life for many people.

Pushing against this, there are many screenless wearables that quantify your wellbeing without the cumbersome screen. Fitbit has been teasing one such device in collaboration with basketball player Steph Curry, and now a whole treasure trove of images has leaked depicting the as-yet-unreleased product.

The pictures were unearthed by Droid Life, with the outlet saying they came across the images on Steph Curry’s social media pages. These photos depict a screenless wearable wrapped around Curry’s wrist, with what looks to be a gray woven strap with an orange border and metallic clasp.

These match earlier leaked images supposedly portraying Fitbit’s wearable, which was officially teased by Google at the start of April. That lends credence to the idea that the product spotted by Droid Life is the same as the one promoted by Google and Steph Curry a few weeks ago.

Aside from the wearable itself, Droid Life also found a Steph Curry video that shows what looks like a modified version of the Fitbit app running on a Google Pixel phone. The Fitbit app in the video is tracking a Sport activity with live data, which Droid Life doesn’t believe the current app is able to do. The implication is that this is a feature that could come to the Fitbit app in order to complement its new wearable.

Seems legit

Interestingly, Curry has been sporting this wearable publicly since at least January 2026, Droid Life claims. He has been seen with it at basketball games, at press conferences and at promotional events, which seems unusual for an unreleased product that, you would think, would be kept under lock and key until it was ready for release.

One possibility is that the parties involved want the device to be spotted in order to build up excitement ahead of its launch date. In that way, it might be an attempt to seed the product into people’s minds before the arrival of any official press campaign.

The claim that the images were discovered on official pages managed by or featuring Steph Curry gives them some weight — after all, Curry is lending his name to the project alongside Google-owned Fitbit. It’s not like Droid Life has spotted an unknown device on the wrist of some other celebrity and has guessed that they’re looking at an in-development Fitbit product.

With the device seemingly making public appearances now, it might not be long until we get official details from Fitbit, such as the product’s name and asking price. If it’s something you're interested in, you might want to keep your eyes peeled.

It's pretty much an open secret at this point that Google is making a new Fitbit fitness tracker. In a teaser video posted on Instagram, the tech giant's brand ambassador and 'performance advisor', basketball legend Steph Curry, promised that something big (or in this case, small) was coming, while wearing a conspicuous screenless wristband.

The upcoming fitness tracker could be a bit of a cash-in on the screenless wearables trend. The Whoop 5.0, the Polar Loop, and the Amazfit Helio Strap all came out last year, and it looks like a Garmin CIRQA smart band is on the horizon too.

However, I think the move makes sense for Google — it's a return to Fitbit's pre-Google acquisition philosophy and formats, and the new tracker has the potential to shoot to the top of our best Fitbits guide.

Back to where it all began

2008 was a simpler time, in which we were all excited about technology and smart gadgets without worrying about being manipulated by tech companies, or that AI was about to take our jobs.

At the 2008 TechCrunch50 conference, a small startup company debuted the FitBit, a wireless smart pedometer that clipped to your clothes, tracked your steps, monitored your sleep patterns with its gyroscopes, and uploaded your data to a server whenever you passed near the Bluetooth-connected dock. You could log in to view your stats, and add information like nutrition tracking.

Back then, TechCrunch's John Biggs said: "the device clips to almost any piece of clothing and is almost invisible", and called it "a tiny fitness gadget that I actually want". It had a very small LED screen, but no other way to interact with the device other than to log onto a computer and tinker with your data. It was a 'set and forget' wellness tracker in the purest sense.

A few years later, the Fitbit Flex popped the tracker on your wrist and the rest is history. The Fitbit Flex was similarly hands-off, with five LED lights indicating your step count as the only interactive elements of the band.

With all that cardio, no wonder Fitbit's eating itself

That minimalist design ethos didn't last. After the success of the Apple Watch, Fitbit joined every other consumer tech manufacturer in going big on interactive watch-format wearables, and in recent years Fitbit only saw moderate success with its watch-style trackers (we gave the Fitbit Versa 4 only 3/5 stars), especially after Google bought Fitbit and used the brand's best features for its excellent Pixel Watches, which ran Google's more advanced Wear OS operating system rather than Fitbit's clunkier software.

Later, Google quietly axed most Fitbit smartwatches after slowly discontinuing many community features. The Fitbit smartwatches were just superfluous to Google's plans.

However, I think the upcoming screenless tracker could represent a return to form for the brand. Similar to the Fitbit Flex, it's a smart band with very little in the way of on-wrist interaction, just passive data collection. While the phone app is obviously much more advanced than Fitbit's early desktop databases, the principle is the same: focus on your workout or sleep, forget the tracker is there, and access your information when and how you want, rather than being subject to push notifications or flashing screens.

If Google gets this right, it could mean Fitbit returns to relevance again as the best fitness tracker, and a top-tier name in a crowded market. I'm waiting for more news with great anticipation.