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

Epson Pulsense PS-100 review: 163 specs compared

Avg. price:~£110Battery life:7 daysScreen size:?Heart rate monitor:?GPS:noWaterproof depth rating:30 m

Epson Pulsense PS-100 Review: Compare 163 technical specifications and 9 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Fitness trackers category and whether it is worth buying.

Epson Pulsense PS-100
6.6/10

Overall score

Score
6.6/ 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 91% of models
Score components

35%

6.0

Technical score

30%

?

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

25%

6.0

Reviews score

10%

?

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

▼Worse than 91% of fitness trackers
7.6

Value for money

Value for money
7.6/ 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 92% of models
Score components

70%

6.6

Overall score

30%

9.9

Price

▼Worse than 92%
6.0

Technical score

Technical score
6.0/ 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 89% of models
Score components

20%

7.3

Sports

20%

3.5

Battery

18%

6.8

Health

18%

4.6

Display

8%

7.6

Smart functions

8%

8.2

Wellness

4%

7.6

Connectivity

4%

6.5

Design

▼Worse than 89%
6.0

Reviews score

Reviews score
6.0/ 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 93% of models

6.0

Mark 7.1 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

7.1

Average grade

20%

7.2

Popularity

Grades by review (9)
8 reviews: 3 with a printed score, 5 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 93%
?

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
  • epson-pulsense-ps-100
epson-pulsense-ps-100
Where to buy
    N/A~ £110
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 Epson Pulsense PS-100

Based on 8 · 1

Sleep and heart rate tracking impress, but the battery life falls short and the look fails to win fans.
Praised
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of fitness tracker Epson Pulsense PS-100

Technical score
Technical score
6.0/ 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 89% of models
Score components:

20%

7.3

Sports

20%

3.5

Battery

18%

6.8

Health

18%

4.6

Display

8%

7.6

Smart functions

8%

8.2

Wellness

4%

7.6

Connectivity

4%

6.5

Design

6.0
Reviews score
6.0
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.6/ 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 92% of models
Score components:

70%

6.6

Overall score

30%

9.9

Price

7.6
Heart rate monitor
?
Resting heart rate
yes
This fitness tracker supports Resting heart rate. 47.5% 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
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
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.
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 weight-loss goals.
Achievements
no
This fitness tracker does not support achievements. 76.7% of fitness trackers support achievements.
Inactivity alerts
no
This fitness tracker does not support inactivity alerts. 79.1% 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
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
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.
no Wi-Fi support.
Show more
Battery life
7 days
Market range: <5 days – >180 days
This fitness tracker offers a battery life of 7 days which is shorter than that of 56.1% of fitness trackers and equal to that of 21.9% of fitness trackers.
About 1.5 days with continuous heart-rate monitoring.
Battery life with GPS on
N/A
Battery life in training mode
36 h
Market range: <5 h – >40 h
This fitness tracker offers a training-mode battery life of 36 h which is longer than that of 82.1% of fitness trackers and equal to that of 3.6% of fitness trackers.
Power-saving battery life
?
Battery capacity
40 mAh
Market range: <45 mAh – >225 mAh
This fitness tracker has a battery capacity of 40 mAh which is lower than that of 91.8% of fitness trackers.
Show more
What reviewers say
Display
no
This fitness tracker does not have a display. 74.2% of fitness trackers have a display.
Screen size
?
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
no
This fitness tracker does not have a replaceable watch band. 77.1% of fitness trackers have a replaceable watch band.
Band width
22 mm
Show more
What reviewers say

Epson Pulsense PS-100 vs the average fitness tracker

246810TotalHealthSportsBatteryDisplayConnectivitySmart functionsDesignWellness
  • Smart alarm
    This fitness tracker supports a smart alarm, while the average fitness tracker does not. 30.8% of fitness trackers support a smart alarm.
  • 28 h longer training-mode battery life
    This fitness tracker has a higher battery life in training mode than the average fitness tracker (36 h vs 8 h). The average fitness tracker has 8 h of battery life in training mode.
    36 h vs 8 h
  • 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.
  • 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.
    Windows app available.
  • 28 h longer training-mode battery life
    This fitness tracker has a higher battery life in training mode than the average fitness tracker (36 h vs 8 h). The average fitness tracker has 8 h of battery life in training mode.
    36 h vs 8 h
  • Smart alarm
    This fitness tracker supports a smart alarm, while the average fitness tracker does not. 30.8% of fitness trackers support a smart alarm.
  • 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.
  • 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.
    Windows app available.
  • 68% smaller battery capacity
    This fitness tracker has a lower battery capacity than the average fitness tracker (40 mAh vs 125 mAh). The average fitness tracker has 125 mAh of battery capacity.
    40 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.
  • 0.5 hours longer charging time
    This fitness tracker has a higher charging time than the average fitness tracker (2 hours vs 1.5 hours). The average fitness tracker needs 1.5 hours to charge.
    source range 1.5-2.5 h.
    2 hours vs 1.5 hours
  • 3 days shorter battery life
    This fitness tracker has a lower battery life than the average fitness tracker (7 days vs 10 days). The average fitness tracker has 10 days of battery life.
    About 1.5 days with continuous heart-rate monitoring.
    7 days vs 10 days
  • 17.8% lower review score
    Reviews score
    6.0/ 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 93% of models

    6.0

    Mark 7.1 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.1

    Average grade

    20%

    7.2

    Popularity

    Grades by review (9)
    8 reviews: 3 with a printed score, 5 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.
    6.0 vs 7.3
  • No battery level indicator
    This fitness tracker does not have a battery level indicator, while the average fitness tracker does. 89% of fitness trackers have a battery level indicator.
  • No inactivity alerts
    This fitness tracker does not support inactivity alerts, while the average fitness tracker does. 78.7% of fitness trackers support inactivity alerts.
  • 29.2% heavier
    This fitness tracker is heavier than the average fitness tracker (31 g vs 24 g). The average fitness tracker weighs 24 g.
    Approximate large-band weight.
    31 g vs 24 g
  • 17.8% lower review score
    Reviews score
    6.0/ 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 93% of models

    6.0

    Mark 7.1 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.1

    Average grade

    20%

    7.2

    Popularity

    Grades by review (9)
    8 reviews: 3 with a printed score, 5 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.
    6.0 vs 7.3
  • 6.3% worse value for money
    Epson Pulsense PS-100 has a lower value-for-money score than the average fitness tracker (7.59 vs 8.1).
    7.59 vs 8.07
  • 57.1% more expensive
    Epson Pulsense PS-100 is more expensive than the average fitness tracker (£110 vs £70).
    £110 vs £70
  • 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.
  • 68% smaller battery capacity
    This fitness tracker has a lower battery capacity than the average fitness tracker (40 mAh vs 125 mAh). The average fitness tracker has 125 mAh of battery capacity.
    40 mAh vs 125 mAh
  • 0.5 hours longer charging time
    This fitness tracker has a higher charging time than the average fitness tracker (2 hours vs 1.5 hours). The average fitness tracker needs 1.5 hours to charge.
    source range 1.5-2.5 h.
    2 hours vs 1.5 hours
  • 3 days shorter battery life
    This fitness tracker has a lower battery life than the average fitness tracker (7 days vs 10 days). The average fitness tracker has 10 days of battery life.
    About 1.5 days with continuous heart-rate monitoring.
    7 days vs 10 days
  • No battery level indicator
    This fitness tracker does not have a battery level indicator, while the average fitness tracker does. 89% of fitness trackers have a battery level indicator.
  • 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.
  • 29.2% heavier
    This fitness tracker is heavier than the average fitness tracker (31 g vs 24 g). The average fitness tracker weighs 24 g.
    Approximate large-band weight.
    31 g vs 24 g
  • 2 ATM lower water resistance rating
    This fitness tracker has a lower ATM rating than the average fitness tracker (3 ATM vs 5 ATM). The average fitness tracker has an ATM rating of 5 ATM.
    3 ATM vs 5 ATM
  • No replaceable watch band
    This fitness tracker does not have a replaceable watch band, while the average fitness tracker does. 76.8% of fitness trackers have a replaceable watch band.
  • 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
  • 1.5 mm thicker design
    This fitness tracker is thicker than the average fitness tracker (12.5 mm vs 11 mm). The average fitness tracker has a thickness of 11 mm.
    12.5 mm vs 11 mm
  • No inactivity alerts
    This fitness tracker does not support inactivity alerts, while the average fitness tracker does. 78.7% of fitness trackers support inactivity alerts.
  • Not compatible with smart scales
    This fitness tracker is not compatible with smart scales, while the average fitness tracker is. 64.9% of fitness trackers are compatible with smart scales.
  • No achievements
    This fitness tracker does not support achievements, while the average fitness tracker does. 76.4% of fitness trackers support achievements.
  • No BMI tracking
    This fitness tracker does not support BMI tracking, while the average fitness tracker does. 72.2% of fitness trackers support BMI tracking.

Video reviews

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

6.0
GeekzMe
✓ explicit
11/08/2015
Hands-on review · battery, app and sleep tracking
Verdict
Epson Pulsense PS-100 is a decent overall pick, with a good build and app, but weak battery life and no food tracking.

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

8.0
etspeaksfromhome.co.uk
≈ estimated
05/02/2015
Month-long test · Everyday tracking
Verdict
The Epson Pulsense PS-100 is a light, easy-to-use heart rate tracker for everyday activity, but its strap slips during exercise and needs nightly charging.
2.0
mamageek.co.uk
✓ explicit
17/02/2015
Few-week test · Fitness band
Verdict
The Epson Pulsense PS-100 gives steady step and heart rate readings, but its confusing app, loose clasp and dated look make it hard to recommend.
6.9
gadgetsandwearables.com
✓ explicit
15/01/2015
Hands-on review · Heart rate tracker
Verdict
The Epson Pulsense PS-100 tracks heart rate all day and suits people who don't mind its looks, but it lacks GPS and a screen.
8.0
dcrainmaker.com
≈ estimated
11/08/2014
Hands-on review · Optical sensor
Verdict
The Epson Pulsense PS-100 has a fast-reading heart rate sensor and can share its data with other apps, but it undercounts run distance.
6.0
urbanjack.wordpress.com
≈ estimated
03/02/2015
Problem-solving blog · Android setup
Verdict
The Epson Pulsense PS-100 works well with running apps once updated, but pairing with Android phones often fails with error codes.
9.0
fitnessmodern.de
≈ estimated
16/10/2014
Hands-on test · Heart rate armband
Verdict
The Epson Pulsense PS-100 is a heart-rate armband with long battery life and sleep tracking, but with no screen you read its data in the phone app.
6.0
lesnumeriques.com
✓ explicit
27/09/2014
Hands-on test · Heart rate band
Verdict
The Epson Pulsense PS-100 tracks heart rate with its own sensor, but its bulky look and 36-hour battery hold it back.
9.0
virginiebichet.org
≈ estimated
14/01/2015
Personal blog · Daily wear
Verdict
The Epson Pulsense PS-100 is a light, waterproof band that works for daily tracking, but its sporty look stands out in town clothes.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Epson Pulsense PS-100

  • Accurate and continuous heart rate monitoring using optical sensors
  • Lightweight and compact design suitable for regular exercise
  • Bright and clear LED indicators for heart rate zone training
  • Automatic activity detection that starts tracking as soon as it is worn
  • Compatibility with popular third-party workout apps like Runkeeper and Endomondo
  • Smart alarm feature that wakes users during light sleep cycles

What customers don't like about Epson Pulsense PS-100

  • Frequent connectivity issues, including difficulty pairing with smartphones via Bluetooth
  • Bulky physical design compared to competitors like Fitbit or Jawbone
  • Unreliable strap and latch mechanism that often requires manual adjustment
  • Short battery life that frequently fails to meet the advertised 40 hours
  • The Pulsense mobile app is described as confusing and not user-friendly
  • Lack of a built-in screen makes it difficult to view real-time data without the app
  • Proprietary charging cradle with a very short and awkward cable

Verdict

The Epson Pulsense PS-100 is a screenless fitness tracker featuring proprietary optical heart-rate sensing technology that monitors pulse 24/7 directly from the wrist. It tracks steps, calories burned, and sleep quality using a multi-axis accelerometer and provides haptic feedback via vibration alerts. The device uses five LED indicators to signal real-time heart rate zones (e.g., fat burning or aerobic) and connects to smartphones via Bluetooth 4.0 for detailed data analysis in the Pulsense View app. Key pros include accurate continuous heart-rate monitoring without a chest strap, a lightweight 31g design, and water resistance up to 30 meters. However, notable cons include its relatively short 36-hour battery life with heart rate active, lack of a built-in display, and reported connectivity issues with the mobile app.

Compare Epson Pulsense PS-100 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 Epson Pulsense PS-100 and other products in the Fitness trackers category

No results found