OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Fitness trackers Methodology v3.0
Fitness trackers Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Fitness trackers Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Fitness trackers Methodology v3.0

Amazfit Equator review: 163 specs compared

Avg. price:~£70Battery life:10 daysScreen size:N/A inchHeart rate monitor:noGPS:noWaterproof depth rating:1.5 m

Amazfit Equator Review: Compare 163 technical specifications and 3 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Fitness trackers category and whether it is worth buying.

Amazfit Equator
6.4/10

Overall score

Score
6.4/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, best-of lists, expert reviews and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 35%, List score 30%, Reviews score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 96% of models
Score components

35%

5.8

Technical score

30%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

25%

5.8

Reviews score

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.1, the mark of a weaker model in this category

▼Worse than 96% of fitness trackers
7.5

Value for money

Value for money
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the fitness tracker's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a fitness tracker with a good balance between quality and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 96% of models
Score components

70%

6.4

Overall score

30%

10

Price

▼Worse than 96%
5.8

Technical score

Technical score
5.8/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 35% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 94% of models
Score components

20%

6.4

Sports

20%

4.4

Battery

18%

5.5

Health

18%

4.0

Display

8%

7.0

Smart functions

8%

8.8

Wellness

4%

7.4

Connectivity

4%

8.4

Design

▼Worse than 94%
5.8

Reviews score

Reviews score
5.8/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 95% of models

5.8

Mark 7.3 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

7.6

Average grade

20%

6.1

Popularity

Grades by review (3)
2 reviews: 1 with a printed score, 1 estimated from the review. 1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
▼Worse than 95%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 30% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • amazfit-equator
  • amazfit-equator
  • amazfit-equator
  • amazfit-equator
amazfit-equator
amazfit-equator
amazfit-equator
amazfit-equator
Where to buy
    N/A~ £70
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the Amazfit Equator

Based on 2 · 1

Reviewers agree the vibration alerts work well, and no real complaints have come up so far.
Praised
Pick a topic to see who said what
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of fitness tracker Amazfit Equator

Technical score
Technical score
5.8/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 35% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 94% of models
Score components:

20%

6.4

Sports

20%

4.4

Battery

18%

5.5

Health

18%

4.0

Display

8%

7.0

Smart functions

8%

8.8

Wellness

4%

7.4

Connectivity

4%

8.4

Design

5.8
Reviews score
5.8
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the fitness tracker's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a fitness tracker with a good balance between quality and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 96% of models
Score components:

70%

6.4

Overall score

30%

10

Price

7.5
Heart rate monitor
no
This fitness tracker does not support heart rate monitoring. 64.2% of fitness trackers support heart rate monitoring.
Resting heart rate
no
This fitness tracker does not support Resting heart rate. 53% of fitness trackers support Resting heart rate.
Fast/slow heart rate alerts
no
This fitness tracker does not support high and low heart rate alerts. 36.5% of fitness trackers support high and low heart rate alerts.
Irregular heart rate alerts
no
This fitness tracker does not support irregular heart rate alerts. 13.7% of fitness trackers support irregular heart rate alerts.
Blood oxygen sensor
no
This fitness tracker does not have a blood oxygen sensor. 32.2% of fitness trackers have a blood oxygen sensor.
Show more
GPS
no
This fitness tracker does not have GPS. 12.7% of fitness trackers have GPS.
Satellite systems supported
no
This fitness tracker supports no satellite systems which is less versatile than that of 14.4% of fitness trackers and the same as that of 85.6% of fitness trackers.
GNSS bands supported
no
This fitness tracker does not support advanced GNSS bands. 8.4% of fitness trackers support advanced GNSS bands.
Galileo support
no
This fitness tracker does not support Galileo. 5.6% of fitness trackers support Galileo.
Acquires GPS faster
no
This fitness tracker does not support faster GPS acquisition. 8.1% of fitness trackers support faster GPS acquisition.
Show more
Notifications
yes
This fitness tracker supports notifications. 27.8% of fitness trackers support notifications.
vibration-only alerts; no screen.
Vibrating alerts
yes
This fitness tracker supports vibration alerts. 14.3% of fitness trackers support vibration alerts.
Call control
no
This fitness tracker does not support call controls. 40.8% of fitness trackers support call controls.
Call answering
no
This fitness tracker does not support call answering. 0.9% of fitness trackers support call answering.
Calendar sync
no
This fitness tracker does not support calendar sync. 20.5% of fitness trackers support calendar sync.
Show more
What reviewers say
Activity reports
yes
This fitness tracker supports activity reports. 5% of fitness trackers support activity reports.
via Zepp app
Goal setting
yes
This fitness tracker supports goal setting. 2.5% of fitness trackers support goal setting.
Achievements
?
Inactivity alerts
yes
This fitness tracker supports inactivity alerts. 21.4% of fitness trackers support inactivity alerts.
Coaching
no
This fitness tracker does not support coaching. 36.4% of fitness trackers support coaching.
Show more
Bluetooth version
4
This fitness tracker supports Bluetooth 4 which is newer than in 4.6% of fitness trackers and equal to that in 47% of fitness trackers.
Maximum Bluetooth range
?
NFC
no
This fitness tracker does not have NFC. 11.8% of fitness trackers have NFC.
Wi-Fi connectivity
no
This fitness tracker does not support Wi-Fi. 2.5% of fitness trackers support Wi-Fi.
Wi-Fi version
no
This fitness tracker does not support modern Wi-Fi. 0.9% of fitness trackers support modern Wi-Fi.
Show more
Battery life
10 days
Market range: <5 days – >180 days
This fitness tracker offers a battery life of 10 days which is longer than that of 47.8% of fitness trackers and equal to that of 6.6% of fitness trackers.
Battery life with GPS on
N/A
Battery life in training mode
N/A
Power-saving battery life
N/A
Battery capacity
15 mAh
Market range: <45 mAh – >225 mAh
This fitness tracker has a battery capacity of 15 mAh which is lower than that of 99.4% of fitness trackers and equal to that of 0.6% of fitness trackers.
Show more
Display
no
This fitness tracker does not have a display. 74.2% of fitness trackers have a display.
Screen size
N/A
Display type
N/A
Screen resolution
N/A
Pixel density
N/A
Show more
Form factor
wristband
Hybrid design
no
This fitness tracker does not support Hybrid design. 2.1% of fitness trackers support Hybrid design.
Designed for kids
no
This fitness tracker is not designed for kids. 3.3% of fitness trackers are designed for kids.
Replaceable watch band
yes
This fitness tracker has a replaceable watch band. 23.4% of fitness trackers have a replaceable watch band.
Band width
N/A
Show more

Amazfit Equator vs the average fitness tracker

246810TotalHealthSportsBatteryDisplayConnectivitySmart functionsDesignWellness
  • Supports wireless charging
    This fitness tracker supports wireless charging, while the average fitness tracker does not. 3.8% of fitness trackers support wireless charging.
    Proprietary inductive charging base.
  • 41.7% lighter
    This fitness tracker is lighter than the average fitness tracker (14 g vs 24 g). The average fitness tracker weighs 24 g.
    14 g vs 24 g
  • Tracks calorie intake
    This fitness tracker supports calorie intake tracking, while the average fitness tracker does not. 38.4% of fitness trackers support calorie intake tracking.
  • 2 mm thinner design
    This fitness tracker is thinner than the average fitness tracker (9 mm vs 11 mm). The average fitness tracker has a thickness of 11 mm.
    9 mm vs 11 mm
  • Gesture control
    This fitness tracker supports gesture controls, while the average fitness tracker does not. 39.6% of fitness trackers support gesture controls.
  • Supports wireless charging
    This fitness tracker supports wireless charging, while the average fitness tracker does not. 3.8% of fitness trackers support wireless charging.
    Proprietary inductive charging base.
  • Gesture control
    This fitness tracker supports gesture controls, while the average fitness tracker does not. 39.6% of fitness trackers support gesture controls.
  • 41.7% lighter
    This fitness tracker is lighter than the average fitness tracker (14 g vs 24 g). The average fitness tracker weighs 24 g.
    14 g vs 24 g
  • 2 mm thinner design
    This fitness tracker is thinner than the average fitness tracker (9 mm vs 11 mm). The average fitness tracker has a thickness of 11 mm.
    9 mm vs 11 mm
  • Tracks calorie intake
    This fitness tracker supports calorie intake tracking, while the average fitness tracker does not. 38.4% of fitness trackers support calorie intake tracking.
  • No heart rate monitoring
    This fitness tracker does not support heart rate monitoring, while the average fitness tracker does. 63.9% of fitness trackers support heart rate monitoring.
  • No automatic activity detection
    This fitness tracker does not support automatic activity detection, while the average fitness tracker does. 56.4% of fitness trackers support automatic activity detection.
  • Higher resting heart rate
    This fitness tracker does not support Resting heart rate, while the average fitness tracker does. 52.7% of fitness trackers support Resting heart rate.
  • No pace measurement
    This fitness tracker does not support pace measurement, while the average fitness tracker does. 62.9% of fitness trackers support pace measurement.
  • 88% smaller battery capacity
    This fitness tracker has a lower battery capacity than the average fitness tracker (15 mAh vs 125 mAh). The average fitness tracker has 125 mAh of battery capacity.
    15 mAh vs 125 mAh
  • No phone finder
    This fitness tracker does not support phone finding, while the average fitness tracker does. 50.9% of fitness trackers support phone finding.
  • 20.5% lower review score
    Reviews score
    5.8/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▼ Worse than 95% of models

    5.8

    Mark 7.3 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.6

    Average grade

    20%

    6.1

    Popularity

    Grades by review (3)
    2 reviews: 1 with a printed score, 1 estimated from the review. 1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    5.8 vs 7.3
  • 48.5 m lower waterproof depth rating
    This fitness tracker has a lower waterproof depth rating than the average fitness tracker (1.5 m vs 50 m). The average fitness tracker has a waterproof depth rating of 50 m.
    1.5 m vs 50 m
  • 20.5% lower review score
    Reviews score
    5.8/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▼ Worse than 95% of models

    5.8

    Mark 7.3 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.6

    Average grade

    20%

    6.1

    Popularity

    Grades by review (3)
    2 reviews: 1 with a printed score, 1 estimated from the review. 1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    5.8 vs 7.3
  • 7.7% worse value for money
    Amazfit Equator has a lower value-for-money score than the average fitness tracker (7.49 vs 8.1).
    7.49 vs 8.07
  • No heart rate monitoring
    This fitness tracker does not support heart rate monitoring, while the average fitness tracker does. 63.9% of fitness trackers support heart rate monitoring.
  • Higher resting heart rate
    This fitness tracker does not support Resting heart rate, while the average fitness tracker does. 52.7% of fitness trackers support Resting heart rate.
  • No automatic activity detection
    This fitness tracker does not support automatic activity detection, while the average fitness tracker does. 56.4% of fitness trackers support automatic activity detection.
  • No pace measurement
    This fitness tracker does not support pace measurement, while the average fitness tracker does. 62.9% of fitness trackers support pace measurement.
  • No route tracker
    This fitness tracker does not support route tracking, while the average fitness tracker does. 52.3% of fitness trackers support route tracking.
  • 88% smaller battery capacity
    This fitness tracker has a lower battery capacity than the average fitness tracker (15 mAh vs 125 mAh). The average fitness tracker has 125 mAh of battery capacity.
    15 mAh vs 125 mAh
  • No display
    This fitness tracker does not have a display, while the average fitness tracker does. 73.9% of fitness trackers have a display.
  • Old Bluetooth version
    This fitness tracker supports an older Bluetooth version than the average fitness tracker (4 vs 4.1). The average fitness tracker supports Bluetooth 4.1.
    4 vs 4.1
  • No phone finder
    This fitness tracker does not support phone finding, while the average fitness tracker does. 50.9% of fitness trackers support phone finding.
  • No stopwatch
    This fitness tracker does not have a stopwatch, while the average fitness tracker does. 60.5% of fitness trackers have a stopwatch.
  • 48.5 m lower waterproof depth rating
    This fitness tracker has a lower waterproof depth rating than the average fitness tracker (1.5 m vs 50 m). The average fitness tracker has a waterproof depth rating of 50 m.
    1.5 m vs 50 m

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

9.0
FunThomas
≈ estimated
05/12/2017
Hands-on review · five days of use, sleep and step tracking
Verdict
The Amazfit Equator has a distinctive look and good features, though it may not fit very small wrists.

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

7.0
gadgetsandwearables.com
✓ explicit
08/09/2016
Hands-on review · Ceramic fitness band
Verdict
The Amazfit Equator is a slim, stylish ceramic tracker with basic step, sleep and distance tracking, suited to beginners but not those wanting heart rate or GPS.
7.0
andreagaleazzi.com
≈ estimated
25/09/2016
Hands-on review · Lightweight band
Verdict
The Amazfit Equator band is light and attractive, wearable on the wrist or as a neck charm, but tracks only steps, calories and sleep.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Amazfit Equator

  • Minimalist and stylish jewelry-like design with a polished ceramic body
  • Extremely slim and lightweight, making it comfortable for 24/7 wear
  • Solid battery life lasting up to 10 days on a single charge
  • Accurate basic tracking for steps, calories, and sleep patterns
  • Convenient wireless charging (Qi standard)
  • Hypoallergenic materials used in the strap and pendant to prevent skin irritation

What customers don't like about Amazfit Equator

  • Frequent connectivity and synchronization issues with the smartphone app
  • Lack of a built-in display; requires the app to view all fitness data
  • Very basic software with limited depth and no third-party app integration (e.g., Google Fit)
  • Does not include advanced features like GPS or heart rate monitoring
  • Small size makes the device easy to lose, especially if used with non-standard straps
  • Vibration alerts can be weak and may not be noticed by some users

Verdict

The Amazfit Equator is a minimalist, jewelry-inspired fitness tracker featuring a lightweight 14-gram ceramic core with a slim, buttonless doughnut design. It is built with a hypoallergenic zirconium oxide ceramic body and is IP68 water-resistant (up to 3 feet for 30 minutes), offering roughly 10 days of battery life from its small 15mAh battery with wireless charging support. Key characteristics include activity monitoring (steps, distance, calories), sleep cycle tracking, and vibrating alerts for incoming calls or alarms. Its main pros are its exceptionally sleek, lightweight aesthetic that can be worn as a wristband or necklace, its skin-friendly materials, and its surprisingly long battery life for its size. Notable cons include the lack of a display, no built-in GPS or heart rate sensor, a higher risk of loss due to its small form factor, and no integration with third-party fitness services like Google Fit.

Compare Amazfit Equator with other products in the Fitness trackers category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Amazfit Equator and other products in the Fitness trackers category

No results found