Scored using Fitness trackers Methodology v1.0
Fitness trackers Methodology v1.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are evaluated mathematically under Frontumo Fitness trackers Methodology v1.0 using verified laboratory benchmarks, technical specifications, and authentic consumer ratings with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Fitness trackers Methodology v1.0

BodyMedia Fit Link Armband Review | 171 Data compared

Avg. price:~£130Battery life:4 daysScreen size:?Heart rate monitor:noGPS:noWaterproof depth rating:0 m

BodyMedia Fit Link Armband Review: Compare 171 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Fitness trackers category and whether it is worth buying.

5.4

Overall score

Score
5.4/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the fitness tracker's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best fitness trackers on the market.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components

80%

5.4

Technical score

20%

?

User score

▼Worse than 98% of fitness-trackers
5.4

Technical score

Technical score
5.4/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of technical performance for products in the Fitness trackers category across these key areas: Health, Sports & Navigation, Smart Features, App & Wellness, Connectivity, Battery, Display, Design & Durability.
When it matters
When you want to compare fitness trackers based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components

20%

6.9

Sports & Navigation

20%

3.1

Battery

18%

5.7

Health

18%

4.6

Display

8%

3.6

Smart Features

8%

8.3

App & Wellness

4%

8.3

Connectivity

4%

6.2

Design & Durability

▼Worse than 97% of fitness-trackers
?

User score

User score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the fitness tracker.
When it matters
When you want to know how a fitness tracker performs in daily use and how reliable it remains over time according to user feedback.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components

70%

?

User ratings

30%

?

Number of reviews

  • No image
No image

Best prices

*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.

Best rankings

Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading...
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of fitness tracker BodyMedia Fit Link Armband

Technical score
Technical score
5.4/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of technical performance for products in the Fitness trackers category across these key areas: Health, Sports & Navigation, Smart Features, App & Wellness, Connectivity, Battery, Display, Design & Durability.
When it matters
When you want to compare fitness trackers based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components:

20%

6.9

Sports & Navigation

20%

3.1

Battery

18%

5.7

Health

18%

4.6

Display

8%

3.6

Smart Features

8%

8.3

App & Wellness

4%

8.3

Connectivity

4%

6.2

Design & Durability

5.4
User score
User score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the fitness tracker.
When it matters
When you want to know how a fitness tracker performs in daily use and how reliable it remains over time according to user feedback.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components

70%

?

User ratings

30%

?

Number of reviews

?
Popularity
Popularity
1.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the fitness tracker.
When it matters
When you prefer to buy a product chosen and reviewed by many other consumers.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Popularity:
BodyMedia Fit Link Armband has a popularity score of 1 point, which is lower than 58.7% of fitness trackers.
1.0
Value for money
Value for money
6.7/ 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
Score components:

60%

5.4

Overall score

40%

9.8

Price

6.7
Heart rate monitor
no
Heart rate monitor
no
This fitness tracker does not support heart rate monitoring. 60.3% of fitness trackers support heart rate monitoring.
Resting heart rate
no
Resting heart rate
no
This fitness tracker does not support Resting heart rate. 47.9% of fitness trackers support Resting heart rate.
Fast/slow heart rate alerts
no
Fast/slow heart rate alerts
no
This fitness tracker does not support high and low heart rate alerts. 34.7% of fitness trackers support high and low heart rate alerts.
Irregular heart rate alerts
no
Irregular heart rate alerts
no
This fitness tracker does not support irregular heart rate alerts. 12.4% of fitness trackers support irregular heart rate alerts.
Blood oxygen sensor
no
Blood oxygen sensor
no
This fitness tracker does not have a blood oxygen sensor. 25.4% of fitness trackers have a blood oxygen sensor.
Show more
GPS
no
GPS
no
This fitness tracker does not have GPS. 11% of fitness trackers have GPS.
Satellite systems supported
?
GNSS bands supported
no
GNSS bands supported
no
This fitness tracker does not support advanced GNSS bands. 8.9% of fitness trackers support advanced GNSS bands.
Galileo support
no
Galileo support
no
This fitness tracker does not support Galileo. 4.9% of fitness trackers support Galileo.
Acquires GPS faster
no
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
Notifications
no
This fitness tracker does not support notifications. 73% of fitness trackers support notifications.
Vibrating alerts
no
Vibrating alerts
no
This fitness tracker does not support vibration alerts. 84.2% of fitness trackers support vibration alerts.
Call control
no
Call control
no
This fitness tracker does not support call controls. 41.8% of fitness trackers support call controls.
Call answering
no
Call answering
no
This fitness tracker does not support call answering. 1% of fitness trackers support call answering.
Calendar sync
no
Calendar sync
no
This fitness tracker does not support calendar sync. 20.3% of fitness trackers support calendar sync.
Show more
Activity reports
yes
Activity reports
yes
This fitness tracker supports activity reports. 5.7% of fitness trackers support activity reports.
via BodyMedia Activity Manager
Goal setting
yes
Goal setting
yes
This fitness tracker supports goal setting. 2.4% of fitness trackers support goal setting.
Achievements
yes
Achievements
yes
This fitness tracker supports achievements. 24.3% of fitness trackers support achievements.
Inactivity alerts
no
Inactivity alerts
no
This fitness tracker does not support inactivity alerts. 77% of fitness trackers support inactivity alerts.
Coaching
no
Coaching
no
This fitness tracker does not support coaching. 34% of fitness trackers support coaching.
Show more
Bluetooth version
2.1
Bluetooth version
2.1
This fitness tracker supports Bluetooth 2.1 which is older than in 95.9% of fitness trackers and equal to that in 1% of fitness trackers.
Maximum Bluetooth range
10 m
Maximum Bluetooth range
10 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 63.4% of fitness trackers.
NFC
no
NFC
no
This fitness tracker does not have NFC. 13% of fitness trackers have NFC.
Wi-Fi connectivity
no
Wi-Fi connectivity
no
This fitness tracker does not support Wi-Fi. 1.8% of fitness trackers support Wi-Fi.
Wi-Fi version
no
Wi-Fi version
no
This fitness tracker does not support modern Wi-Fi. 1% of fitness trackers support modern Wi-Fi.
no Wi-Fi support.
Show more
Battery life
4 days
Battery life
4 days
This fitness tracker offers a battery life of 4 days which is shorter than that of 92.1% of fitness trackers and equal to that of 2% of fitness trackers.
Battery life with GPS on
N/A
Battery life in training mode
?
Battery life in power-saving mode
?
Battery capacity
?
Show more
Display
no
Display
no
This fitness tracker does not have a display. 76.4% of fitness trackers have a display.
Screen size
?
Display type
N/A
Screen resolution
N/A
Pixel density
N/A
Show more
Form factor
armband
Hybrid design
no
Hybrid design
no
This fitness tracker does not support Hybrid design. 2.4% of fitness trackers support Hybrid design.
Designed for kids
no
Designed for kids
no
This fitness tracker is not designed for kids. 2.4% of fitness trackers are designed for kids.
Replaceable watch band
yes
Replaceable watch band
yes
This fitness tracker has a replaceable watch band. 25.6% of fitness trackers have a replaceable watch band.
Band width
?
Show more

BodyMedia Fit Link Armband vs the average fitness tracker

246810TotalHealthSports & NavigationBatteryDisplayConnectivitySmart FeaturesDesign & DurabilityApp & Wellness
  • Built-in temperature sensor
    Temperature sensor
    yes
    This fitness tracker has a temperature sensor, while the average fitness tracker does not. 9.8% of fitness trackers have a temperature sensor.
    Skin or ambient temperature sensor.
  • Tracks skin temperature
    Skin temperature tracking
    yes
    This fitness tracker supports skin temperature tracking, while the average fitness tracker does not. 11.3% of fitness trackers support skin temperature tracking.
    Tracks skin temperature trends.
  • Windows compatible
    Compatible with Windows
    yes
    This fitness tracker is compatible with Windows, while the average fitness tracker is not. 22.3% of fitness trackers are compatible with Windows.
    Via BodyMedia Sync.
  • Mac OS X compatible
    Compatible with Mac OS X
    yes
    This fitness tracker is compatible with Mac OS X, while the average fitness tracker is not. 28.8% of fitness trackers are compatible with Mac OS X.
    Via BodyMedia Sync.
  • Shock resistance standard
    Shock resistance standard
    MIL-STD-810H
    This fitness tracker meets a stronger shock resistance standard than the average fitness tracker (MIL-STD-810H vs MIL-STD-810G). The average fitness tracker meets the MIL-STD-810G shock resistance standard.
    MIL-STD-810H vs MIL-STD-810G
  • Tracks calorie intake
    Calorie intake tracking
    yes
    This fitness tracker supports calorie intake tracking, while the average fitness tracker does not. 39.3% of fitness trackers support calorie intake tracking.
  • Sweat tracking
    Sweat tracking
    yes
    This fitness tracker supports sweat tracking, while the average fitness tracker does not. 7.7% of fitness trackers support sweat tracking.
    Tracks perspiration via galvanic skin response.
  • EDA sensor
    EDA sensor
    yes
    This fitness tracker has an EDA sensor, while the average fitness tracker does not. 6.6% of fitness trackers have an EDA sensor.
    Galvanic skin response sensor.
  • Built-in temperature sensor
    Temperature sensor
    yes
    This fitness tracker has a temperature sensor, while the average fitness tracker does not. 9.8% of fitness trackers have a temperature sensor.
    Skin or ambient temperature sensor.
  • Tracks skin temperature
    Skin temperature tracking
    yes
    This fitness tracker supports skin temperature tracking, while the average fitness tracker does not. 11.3% of fitness trackers support skin temperature tracking.
    Tracks skin temperature trends.
  • Sweat tracking
    Sweat tracking
    yes
    This fitness tracker supports sweat tracking, while the average fitness tracker does not. 7.7% of fitness trackers support sweat tracking.
    Tracks perspiration via galvanic skin response.
  • EDA sensor
    EDA sensor
    yes
    This fitness tracker has an EDA sensor, while the average fitness tracker does not. 6.6% of fitness trackers have an EDA sensor.
    Galvanic skin response sensor.
  • Windows compatible
    Compatible with Windows
    yes
    This fitness tracker is compatible with Windows, while the average fitness tracker is not. 22.3% of fitness trackers are compatible with Windows.
    Via BodyMedia Sync.
  • Mac OS X compatible
    Compatible with Mac OS X
    yes
    This fitness tracker is compatible with Mac OS X, while the average fitness tracker is not. 28.8% of fitness trackers are compatible with Mac OS X.
    Via BodyMedia Sync.
  • 1 more physical buttons
    N. of physical buttons
    1
    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
  • Shock resistance standard
    Shock resistance standard
    MIL-STD-810H
    This fitness tracker meets a stronger shock resistance standard than the average fitness tracker (MIL-STD-810H vs MIL-STD-810G). The average fitness tracker meets the MIL-STD-810G shock resistance standard.
    MIL-STD-810H vs MIL-STD-810G
  • Tracks calorie intake
    Calorie intake tracking
    yes
    This fitness tracker supports calorie intake tracking, while the average fitness tracker does not. 39.3% of fitness trackers support calorie intake tracking.
  • Tracks temperature
    Temperature tracking
    yes
    This fitness tracker supports temperature tracking, while the average fitness tracker does not. 12.9% of fitness trackers support temperature tracking.
  • No heart rate monitoring
    Heart rate monitor
    no
    This fitness tracker does not support heart rate monitoring, while the average fitness tracker does. 60% of fitness trackers support heart rate monitoring.
  • 6 days shorter battery life
    Battery life
    4 days
    This fitness tracker has a lower battery life than the average fitness tracker (4 days vs 10 days). The average fitness tracker has 10 days of battery life.
    4 days vs 10 days
  • No automatic activity detection
    Automatic activity detection
    no
    This fitness tracker does not support automatic activity detection, while the average fitness tracker does. 52% of fitness trackers support automatic activity detection.
  • 1.5 hours longer charging time
    Charging time
    3 hours
    This fitness tracker has a higher charging time than the average fitness tracker (3 hours vs 1.5 hours). The average fitness tracker needs 1.5 hours to charge.
    3 hours vs 1.5 hours
  • No pace measurement
    Measures pace
    no
    This fitness tracker does not support pace measurement, while the average fitness tracker does. 61.7% of fitness trackers support pace measurement.
  • No notifications
    Notifications
    no
    This fitness tracker does not support notifications, while the average fitness tracker does. 72.6% of fitness trackers support notifications.
  • 50 m lower waterproof depth rating
    Waterproof depth rating
    0 m
    This fitness tracker has a lower waterproof depth rating than the average fitness tracker (0 m vs 50 m). The average fitness tracker has a waterproof depth rating of 50 m.
    Not waterproof.
    0 m vs 50 m
  • No vibrating alerts
    Vibrating alerts
    no
    This fitness tracker does not support vibration alerts, while the average fitness tracker does. 83.8% of fitness trackers support vibration alerts.
  • 17.9% worse value for money
    BodyMedia Fit Link Armband has a lower value-for-money score than the average fitness tracker (6.72 vs 7.9).
    6.72 vs 7.92
  • 5.07x less popular
    BodyMedia Fit Link Armband has a lower popularity than the average fitness tracker (1 vs 5.1).
    1 vs 5.07
  • 85.7% more expensive
    BodyMedia Fit Link Armband is more expensive than the average fitness tracker (£130 vs £70).
    £130 vs £70
  • No heart rate monitoring
    Heart rate monitor
    no
    This fitness tracker does not support heart rate monitoring, while the average fitness tracker does. 60% of fitness trackers support heart rate monitoring.
  • 6 days shorter battery life
    Battery life
    4 days
    This fitness tracker has a lower battery life than the average fitness tracker (4 days vs 10 days). The average fitness tracker has 10 days of battery life.
    4 days vs 10 days
  • 1.5 hours longer charging time
    Charging time
    3 hours
    This fitness tracker has a higher charging time than the average fitness tracker (3 hours vs 1.5 hours). The average fitness tracker needs 1.5 hours to charge.
    3 hours vs 1.5 hours
  • No battery level indicator
    Battery level indicator
    no
    This fitness tracker does not have a battery level indicator, while the average fitness tracker does. 87.2% of fitness trackers have a battery level indicator.
  • No display
    Display
    no
    This fitness tracker does not have a display, while the average fitness tracker does. 76.1% of fitness trackers have a display.
  • Old Bluetooth version
    Bluetooth version
    2.1
    This fitness tracker supports an older Bluetooth version than the average fitness tracker (2.1 vs 4). The average fitness tracker supports Bluetooth 4.0.
    2.1 vs 4.0
  • No notifications
    Notifications
    no
    This fitness tracker does not support notifications, while the average fitness tracker does. 72.6% of fitness trackers support notifications.
  • No silent alarm
    Silent alarm
    no
    This fitness tracker does not support a silent alarm, while the average fitness tracker does. 80.4% of fitness trackers support a silent alarm.
  • No vibrating alerts
    Vibrating alerts
    no
    This fitness tracker does not support vibration alerts, while the average fitness tracker does. 83.8% of fitness trackers support vibration alerts.
  • No stopwatch
    Stopwatch
    no
    This fitness tracker does not have a stopwatch, while the average fitness tracker does. 59.7% of fitness trackers have a stopwatch.
  • Limited firmware update method
    Firmware update method
    USB
    This fitness tracker uses a less convenient firmware update method than the average fitness tracker (USB vs over-the-air). The average fitness tracker uses over-the-air for firmware updates.
    USB vs over-the-air
  • 50 m lower waterproof depth rating
    Waterproof depth rating
    0 m
    This fitness tracker has a lower waterproof depth rating than the average fitness tracker (0 m vs 50 m). The average fitness tracker has a waterproof depth rating of 50 m.
    Not waterproof.
    0 m vs 50 m
  • 81.4% heavier
    Thickness
    45.36 g mm
    This fitness tracker is heavier than the average fitness tracker (45.4 g vs 25 g). The average fitness tracker weighs 25 g.
    45.36 g vs 25 g
  • 1.7 mm thicker design
    Thickness
    12.7 mm
    This fitness tracker is thicker than the average fitness tracker (12.7 mm vs 11 mm). The average fitness tracker has a thickness of 11 mm.
    12.7 mm vs 11 mm
  • 6 older release date
    Release date
    2010
    This fitness tracker was released earlier than the average fitness tracker (2010 vs 2016). The average fitness tracker was released in 2016.
    November 2010
    2010 vs 2016
  • No inactivity alerts
    Inactivity alerts
    no
    This fitness tracker does not support inactivity alerts, while the average fitness tracker does. 76.6% of fitness trackers support inactivity alerts.
  • No BMI tracking
    BMI tracking
    no
    This fitness tracker does not support BMI tracking, while the average fitness tracker does. 71% of fitness trackers support BMI tracking.
  • Paid app
    Free app
    no
    This fitness tracker does not have a free app, while the average fitness tracker does. 96.2% of fitness trackers have a free app.
    Paid membership needed to access data.

Video reviews

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

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

T
thinkcomputers.org
06/08/2013
Summary of the review
H
huffpost.com
21/02/2013
Summary of the review
T
threelilsisters.wordpress.com
30/05/2012
Summary of the review
M
metrofamilymagazine.com
25/11/2012
Summary of the review
T
thinkcomputers.org
06/08/2013
Summary of the review
M
mddionline.com
26/07/2012
Summary of the review
L
laptopmag.com
07/05/2012
Summary of the review
T
the-gadgeteer.com
15/06/2012
Summary of the review
W
weightymatters.ca
13/06/2013
Summary of the review
A
aesirsports.de
14/04/2015
Summary of the review
T
thinkcomputers.org
06/08/2013
Summary of the review
M
metrofamilymagazine.com
25/11/2012
Summary of the review
L
laptopmag.com
07/05/2012
Summary of the review
T
the-gadgeteer.com
15/06/2012
Summary of the review
T
threelilsisters.wordpress.com
30/05/2012
Summary of the review
T
the-gadgeteer.com
15/06/2012
Summary of the review
M
mddionline.com
26/07/2012
Summary of the review

Third-party reviews

What we like about BodyMedia Fit Link Armband

  • High accuracy in calorie burn estimation compared to other trackers
  • Detailed physiological data including skin temperature, heat flux, and galvanic skin response
  • Comprehensive and motivating reporting tools via web and mobile apps
  • Long battery life, often lasting several days to nearly two weeks
  • Seamless real-time tracking through Bluetooth connectivity on the Link model
  • Automatic sleep tracking and efficiency scoring

What we don't like about BodyMedia Fit Link Armband

  • Mandatory monthly subscription fee to access data and services
  • Armband design can be bulky, uncomfortable to wear, and difficult to hide under clothing
  • Not waterproof; must be removed for showering or swimming
  • Connectivity issues, such as needing to re-enter Bluetooth PINs repeatedly
  • Food database can be less comprehensive than third-party alternatives
  • Lacks a heart rate monitor, which some users expect in a fitness device

Verdict

The BodyMedia FIT Link Armband is a professional-grade wearable monitor measuring 2.2 x 2.4 x 0.5 inches and weighing approximately 1.6 ounces, designed for placement on the left tricep to capture over 5,000 data points per minute. Its standout characteristic is a sophisticated four-sensor array that tracks motion via a 3-axis accelerometer, skin temperature, heat flux, and galvanic skin response to provide clinical-level calorie burn accuracy (over 90%) and detailed sleep efficiency metrics. Key pros include Bluetooth connectivity for real-time data streaming to iOS and Android apps, a rechargeable battery lasting up to 4 days, and seamless integration with third-party platforms like MyFitnessPal. However, significant cons include a mandatory monthly subscription fee for data access, a relatively bulky form factor compared to modern wrist trackers, and a lack of water resistance, making it unsuitable for swimming or showers.

Compare BodyMedia Fit Link Armband 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 BodyMedia Fit Link Armband and other products in the Fitness trackers category

No results found