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

Atlas Wristband review: 163 specs compared

Avg. price:~£20Battery life:?Screen size:?Heart rate monitor:yesGPS:noWaterproof depth rating:30 m

Atlas Wristband Review: Compare 163 technical specifications and 10 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Fitness trackers category and whether it is worth buying.

Atlas Wristband
7.3/10

Overall score

Score
7.3/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 50% of models
Score components

35%

7.2

Technical score

30%

?

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

25%

7.2

Reviews score

10%

?

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

â–²Better than 50% of fitness trackers
8.1

Value for money

Value for money
8.1/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 54% of models
Score components

70%

7.3

Overall score

30%

10

Price

â–¼Worse than 54%
7.2

Technical score

Technical score
7.2/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 59% of models
Score components

20%

6.9

Sports

20%

7.4

Battery

18%

6.3

Health

18%

7.4

Display

8%

6.3

Smart functions

8%

9.6

Wellness

4%

7.5

Connectivity

4%

7.1

Design

â–²Better than 59%
7.2

Reviews score

Reviews score
7.2/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 57% of models

7.2

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

80%

7.3

Average grade

20%

7.3

Popularity

Grades by review (10)
7 reviews: 2 with a printed score, 5 estimated from the review. 3 video reviews, each 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.
â–¼Worse than 57%
?

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
  • atlas
atlas
Where to buy
    N/A~ £20
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 Atlas Wristband

Based on 5 · 3

Heart rate, guided workouts and muscle breakdowns impress, rep counting divides opinion, and the weak battery and bulky design disappoint.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of fitness tracker Atlas Wristband

Technical score
Technical score
7.2/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 59% of models
Score components:

20%

6.9

Sports

20%

7.4

Battery

18%

6.3

Health

18%

7.4

Display

8%

6.3

Smart functions

8%

9.6

Wellness

4%

7.5

Connectivity

4%

7.1

Design

7.2
Reviews score
7.2
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
8.1/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 54% of models
Score components:

70%

7.3

Overall score

30%

10

Price

8.1
Heart rate monitor
yes
This fitness tracker supports heart rate monitoring. 36.2% 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
?
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
What reviewers say
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.
no satellite positioning support.
GNSS bands supported
?
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
no
This fitness tracker does not support notifications. 72.7% of fitness trackers support notifications.
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
Activity reports
yes
This fitness tracker supports activity reports. 5% of fitness trackers support activity reports.
Goal setting
yes
This fitness tracker supports goal setting. 2.5% of fitness trackers support goal setting.
Includes workout rep goals.
Achievements
?
Inactivity alerts
yes
This fitness tracker supports inactivity alerts. 21.4% of fitness trackers support inactivity alerts.
Coaching
yes
This fitness tracker supports coaching. 64% of fitness trackers support coaching.
Coach Mode guidance.
Show more
What reviewers say
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
10 m
Market range: <9 m – >30 m
This fitness tracker offers a Bluetooth range of 10 m which is higher than that of 14.9% of fitness trackers and equal to that of 64.5% of fitness trackers.
NFC
yes
This fitness tracker has NFC. 88.7% of fitness trackers have NFC.
Payments use Google Wallet.
Wi-Fi connectivity
no
This fitness tracker does not support Wi-Fi. 2.5% of fitness trackers support Wi-Fi.
Wi-Fi version
?
Show more
Battery life
?
Battery life with GPS on
N/A
Battery life in training mode
1 h
Market range: <5 h – >40 h
This fitness tracker offers a training-mode battery life of 1 h which is shorter than that of 100% of fitness trackers.
Power-saving battery life
45 h
Market range: <7 h – >37 h
This fitness tracker offers a power-saving battery life of 45 h which is longer than that of 100% of fitness trackers.
Essential mode.
Battery capacity
120 mAh
Market range: <45 mAh – >225 mAh
This fitness tracker has a battery capacity of 120 mAh which is lower than that of 50.6% of fitness trackers and equal to that of 2.4% of fitness trackers.
Show more
What reviewers say
Display
yes
This fitness tracker has a display. 26.3% of fitness trackers have a display.
Screen size
?
Display type
PMOLED
This fitness tracker uses PMOLED display technology which is less advanced than that of 51.4% of fitness trackers and the same as that of 6.8% of fitness trackers.
Screen resolution
128x 64
This fitness tracker has a screen resolution of 128x64 which is higher than that of 53.6% of fitness trackers and equal to that of 2% of fitness trackers.
Pixel density
?
Show more
What reviewers say
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
?
Show more
What reviewers say

Atlas Wristband vs the average fitness tracker

246810TotalHealthSportsBatteryDisplayConnectivitySmart functionsDesignWellness
  • Logs single exercises
    This fitness tracker records the single exercises inside a workout, while the average fitness tracker does not. 9.1% of fitness trackers do this.
  • 0.5 hours shorter charging time
    This fitness tracker has a lower charging time than the average fitness tracker (1 hours vs 1.5 hours). The average fitness tracker needs 1.5 hours to charge.
    1 hours vs 1.5 hours
  • Touchscreen
    This fitness tracker has a touchscreen, while the average fitness tracker does not. 46.7% of fitness trackers have a touchscreen.
  • Auto pause
    This fitness tracker supports auto pause, while the average fitness tracker does not. 22.4% of fitness trackers support auto pause.
    Strength sessions only.
  • Coaching features
    This fitness tracker supports coaching, while the average fitness tracker does not. 36.3% of fitness trackers support coaching.
    Coach Mode guidance.
  • Color display
    This fitness tracker has a color display, while the average fitness tracker does not. 39.1% of fitness trackers have a color display.
  • Built-in gyroscope
    This fitness tracker has a gyroscope, while the average fitness tracker does not. 28.7% of fitness trackers have a gyroscope.
  • Ambient light sensor
    This fitness tracker has an ambient light sensor, while the average fitness tracker does not. 16.9% of fitness trackers have an ambient light sensor.
  • 3.5x cheaper
    Atlas Wristband is cheaper than the average fitness tracker (£20 vs £70).
    £20 vs £70
  • Readiness score support
    This fitness tracker shows a readiness score, while the average fitness tracker does not. 7.9% of fitness trackers show a readiness score.
    Shows a readiness score.
  • Logs single exercises
    This fitness tracker records the single exercises inside a workout, while the average fitness tracker does not. 9.1% of fitness trackers do this.
  • Auto pause
    This fitness tracker supports auto pause, while the average fitness tracker does not. 22.4% of fitness trackers support auto pause.
    Strength sessions only.
  • Built-in gyroscope
    This fitness tracker has a gyroscope, while the average fitness tracker does not. 28.7% of fitness trackers have a gyroscope.
  • Map support
    This fitness tracker supports maps, while the average fitness tracker does not. 0.4% of fitness trackers support maps.
    Supports on-screen maps.
  • 0.5 hours shorter charging time
    This fitness tracker has a lower charging time than the average fitness tracker (1 hours vs 1.5 hours). The average fitness tracker needs 1.5 hours to charge.
    1 hours vs 1.5 hours
  • 25 h longer power-saving battery life
    This fitness tracker has a higher battery life in power-saving mode than the average fitness tracker (45 h vs 20 h). The average fitness tracker has 20 h of battery life in power-saving mode.
    Essential mode.
    45 h vs 20 h
  • Touchscreen
    This fitness tracker has a touchscreen, while the average fitness tracker does not. 46.7% of fitness trackers have a touchscreen.
  • Color display
    This fitness tracker has a color display, while the average fitness tracker does not. 39.1% of fitness trackers have a color display.
  • Ambient light sensor
    This fitness tracker has an ambient light sensor, while the average fitness tracker does not. 16.9% of fitness trackers have an ambient light sensor.
  • Durable display glass
    This fitness tracker uses more durable display glass than the average fitness tracker (asahi glass vs glass). The average fitness tracker uses glass display glass.
    asahi glass vs glass
  • NFC
    This fitness tracker has NFC, while the average fitness tracker does not. 11.7% of fitness trackers have NFC.
    Payments use Google Wallet.
  • 1 more physical buttons
    This fitness tracker has a higher physical buttons than the average fitness tracker (1 vs 0). The average fitness tracker has 0 of physical buttons.
    1 vs 0
  • Coaching features
    This fitness tracker supports coaching, while the average fitness tracker does not. 36.3% of fitness trackers support coaching.
    Coach Mode guidance.
  • Available on PC
    This fitness tracker is available on PC, while the average fitness tracker is not. 17.2% of fitness trackers are available on PC.
  • 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.
  • Lower screen resolution
    This fitness tracker has a lower screen resolution than the average fitness tracker (128x64 vs 194x368). The average fitness tracker has a screen resolution of 194x368.
    128x64 vs 194x368
  • No notifications
    This fitness tracker does not support notifications, while the average fitness tracker does. 72.3% of fitness trackers support notifications.
  • No step tracking
    This fitness tracker does not support step tracking, while the average fitness tracker does. 97.9% of fitness trackers support step tracking.
  • 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 sleep reports
    This fitness tracker does not support sleep reports, while the average fitness tracker does. 86.6% of fitness trackers support sleep reports.
  • 2.08x heavier
    This fitness tracker is heavier than the average fitness tracker (50 g vs 24 g). The average fitness tracker weighs 24 g.
    50 g vs 24 g
  • 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 sleep reports
    This fitness tracker does not support sleep reports, while the average fitness tracker does. 86.6% of fitness trackers support sleep reports.
  • 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 step tracking
    This fitness tracker does not support step tracking, while the average fitness tracker does. 97.9% of fitness trackers support step tracking.
  • 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.
  • 7 h shorter training-mode battery life
    This fitness tracker has a lower battery life in training mode than the average fitness tracker (1 h vs 8 h). The average fitness tracker has 8 h of battery life in training mode.
    1 h vs 8 h
  • Lower screen resolution
    This fitness tracker has a lower screen resolution than the average fitness tracker (128x64 vs 194x368). The average fitness tracker has a screen resolution of 194x368.
    128x64 vs 194x368
  • 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 notifications
    This fitness tracker does not support notifications, while the average fitness tracker does. 72.3% of fitness trackers support notifications.
  • 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.
  • 2.08x heavier
    This fitness tracker is heavier than the average fitness tracker (50 g vs 24 g). The average fitness tracker weighs 24 g.
    50 g vs 24 g
  • 20 m lower waterproof depth rating
    This fitness tracker has a lower waterproof depth rating than the average fitness tracker (30 m vs 50 m). The average fitness tracker has a waterproof depth rating of 50 m.
    30 m vs 50 m
  • 10.88 mm greater height
    This fitness tracker is taller than the average fitness tracker (52.2 mm vs 41.3 mm). The average fitness tracker has a height of 41.325 mm.
    52.2 mm vs 41.325 mm

Video reviews

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

9.0
RivannaHipSnap / Dave The Kayaker
≈ estimated
26/01/2017
Hands-on review · one month of gym use
Verdict
Atlas Wristband is an excellent gym tracker with strong exercise recognition, but battery life is short.
8.0
Ars Technica
≈ estimated
20/01/2016
Hands-on review · gym rep counting and app tests
Verdict
Atlas Wristband is a decent first-generation tracker for gym-goers, but it needs slow, controlled reps and costs a lot.
7.0
Sami Loyal PLUS
≈ estimated
29/09/2016
Hands-on review · gym and home workout tracking
Verdict
Atlas Wristband is a good gym-only tracker, but it is not worth buying for cardio, where better watches exist.

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

7.0
arstechnica.com
≈ estimated
21/01/2016
Gym review · Rep-counting band
Verdict
The Atlas Wristband is a gym-focused tracker that counts reps and tracks heart rate well, but its bulky build and rigid move matching hold it back.
8.0
wareable.com
≈ estimated
01/04/2016
Gym review · Freestyle counting
Verdict
The Atlas Wristband reliably counts gym reps in freestyle mode, but its awkward sideways design and lack of form analysis hold it back.
5.0
pcmag.com
✓ explicit
12/02/2016
Hands-on test · Gym workout tracker
Verdict
The Atlas Wristband suits gym-goers who want rep and set counts, but its chunky design and frequent missed reps hold it back.
8.0
trustedreviews.com
≈ estimated
13/03/2015
Hands-on test · Swim and gym tracker
Verdict
The Atlas Wristband is one of the most feature-packed trackers, with swim tracking and a smart timer, but its quirky horizontal design may put people off.
5.0
uk.pcmag.com
✓ explicit
12/02/2016
Full review · Gym coaching tracker
Verdict
The Atlas Wristband is a touch-screen gym coach that guides workouts, but missed reps and a chunky build hold it back.
7.0
zdnet.com
≈ estimated
19/03/2016
Hands-on test · Bodyweight workouts
Verdict
The Atlas Wristband suits indoor bodyweight and gym workouts, with freestyle counting that works well, but missed reps and a scratch-prone screen are drawbacks.
7.0
arstechnica.com
≈ estimated
20/01/2016
Video review · Strength training
Verdict
The Atlas Wristband is a first-generation gym tracker that counts reps accurately only when you move slowly and carefully.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Atlas Wristband

  • Specialised tracking for strength training and weightlifting exercises
  • Automatic exercise recognition and rep counting
  • Ability to 'teach' the device and learn new custom exercises
  • Well-designed companion app with muscle-mapping visualisations
  • Uses a standard Micro-USB port for charging instead of a proprietary dock
  • Handy on-screen data display during workouts

What customers don't like about Atlas Wristband

  • Bulky and ostentatious design that is not suitable for all-day wear
  • Short battery life compared to standard fitness trackers
  • Inconsistent accuracy in rep counting if form or motion is not perfect
  • Primarily designed for left-wrist wear due to sensor calibration
  • Poor screen visibility in bright outdoor light
  • High price point relative to competing devices
  • Lacks standard features like step tracking, sleep monitoring, or GPS

Verdict

The Atlas Wristband is a specialized fitness tracker designed for weightlifting and strength training, featuring dual 32-bit ARM M4 processors and 3D motion sensors that automatically identify exercises and count repetitions. It utilizes a 1.8-inch by 1.1-inch PMOLED monochrome touchscreen (128x64 pixels) and includes an integrated optical heart rate monitor, all housed in a modular, 1.76-ounce unit with a magnetic dock. Key pros include its ability to log over 100 different exercises, a dedicated Coach Mode for guided routines, and the ability to edit weights and reps directly on the wrist without a smartphone. However, its significant cons include a bulky horizontal design optimized only for left-wrist wear, a short battery life that often only lasts for a single workout or one hour of active training, and a lack of standard all-day features like step, sleep, or GPS tracking.

Compare Atlas Wristband 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 Atlas Wristband and other products in the Fitness trackers category

No results found