Follow ZDNET:ย Add us as a preferred sourceย on Google.
ZDNET's key takeaways
- I tested theย Fitbit Air's heart rate data.ย
- I compared it against the Polar H10 chest strap, a reliable heart rate monitor. ย
- The Fitbit Air is good for heart rate checks, but not as accurate as a calorie counter.ย
Just how accurate is that health tracker around your wrist? The truth is, you don't really know. The companies that create these devices equip them with sensors that detect every heart rate spike or dip, but their trackers are designed for general, recreational use. Inaccuracies happen.ย
Still, many of the top health trackers out there are surprisingly accurate, and technological advances have brought each new generation a little closer to the gold standard of exercise and heart rate monitoring.ย
Also: Google's Fitbit Air is a $99 screenless wearable that I can actually take seriously
I tested this out on the Fitbit Air, one of the fitness world's bigger releases of the year. Using the Polar H10 chest strap as a control, I recorded my gym workout to see how the devices compared. While the Polar H10 chest strap is also a consumer product, it's often considered the gold standard of heart rate monitoring for its technical accuracy. One study found that the chest strap showed “almost perfect agreement” with a reference Lead II ECG system, for example.ย
My workout routine included both a strength training and treadmill session, my usual blend of weight training and cardio. Here's the breakdown.ย
On the treadmill
I started out walking, checking the in-the-moment heart rate measurements on both the Polar and the Google Health app. Toggling between the two, the Fitbit Air was within one or two points of the Polar chest strap.ย
As I started to run, the Polar immediately tracked this increase in heart rate as the Fitbit Air's readings lagged behind. For example, as I began running, Polar captured a heart rate of 141. In that same minute, the Fitbit Air recorded a…