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

Lava Befit review: 163 specs compared

Avg. price:~£20Battery life:6 daysScreen size:1.1 inchHeart rate monitor:yesGPS:?Waterproof depth rating:1 m

Lava Befit Review: Compare 163 technical specifications to see how this product ranks in the Fitness trackers category and whether it is worth buying.

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 54% of models
Score components

35%

7.4

Technical score

30%

?

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

25%

?

Reviews scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.2, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

?

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

â–²Better than 54% 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%
7.4

Technical score

Technical score
7.4/ 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 68% of models
Score components

20%

8.6

Sports

20%

5.2

Battery

18%

8.3

Health

18%

6.6

Display

8%

7.8

Smart functions

8%

9.2

Wellness

4%

7.9

Connectivity

4%

6.8

Design

â–²Better than 68%
?

Reviews score

Reviews score
✕
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
Grades by review (0)
We have not found an independent test of this model yet. Until we do, its review part counts as 7.2.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
No expert tests yet
?

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
  • No image
No image
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.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of fitness tracker Lava Befit

Technical score
Technical score
7.4/ 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 68% of models
Score components:

20%

8.6

Sports

20%

5.2

Battery

18%

8.3

Health

18%

6.6

Display

8%

7.8

Smart functions

8%

9.2

Wellness

4%

7.9

Connectivity

4%

6.8

Design

7.4
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
?
Fast/slow heart rate alerts
?
Irregular heart rate alerts
?
Blood oxygen sensor
?
Show more
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.
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.
Achievements
yes
This fitness tracker supports achievements. 23.8% of fitness trackers support achievements.
Inactivity alerts
yes
This fitness tracker supports inactivity alerts. 21.4% of fitness trackers support inactivity alerts.
Coaching
?
Show more
Bluetooth version
5
This fitness tracker supports Bluetooth 5 which is newer than in 68% of fitness trackers and equal to that in 17.8% 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.
Show more
Battery life
6 days
Market range: <5 days – >180 days
This fitness tracker offers a battery life of 6 days which is shorter than that of 78.5% of fitness trackers and equal to that of 2.6% of fitness trackers.
Standby claim also cited
Battery life with GPS on
N/A
Battery life in training mode
?
Power-saving battery life
?
Battery capacity
?
Show more
Display
yes
This fitness tracker has a display. 26.3% of fitness trackers have a display.
Screen size
1.1 inch
Market range: <0.72 inch – >1.6 inch
This fitness tracker has a screen size of 1.1 inch which is larger than that of 54.4% of fitness trackers and equal to that of 3.8% of fitness trackers.
Display type
LCD
This fitness tracker uses LCD display technology which is less advanced than that of 64.1% of fitness trackers and the same as that of 6.4% of fitness trackers.
Screen resolution
160x 80
This fitness tracker has a screen resolution of 160x80 which is higher than that of 64.3% of fitness trackers and equal to that of 1.5% of fitness trackers.
Pixel density
?
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.
Quick-release band system.
Band width
22 mm
Show more

Lava Befit vs the average fitness tracker

246810TotalHealthSportsBatteryDisplayConnectivitySmart functionsDesignWellness
  • 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
  • Multi-sport mode
    This fitness tracker supports multi-sport mode, while the average fitness tracker does not. 14.5% of fitness trackers support multi-sport mode.
  • Tracks elevation
    This fitness tracker supports elevation tracking, while the average fitness tracker does not. 24.5% of fitness trackers support elevation tracking.
    Stair/elevation changes
  • 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 temperature sensor
    This fitness tracker has a temperature sensor, while the average fitness tracker does not. 13.4% of fitness trackers have a temperature sensor.
    Body temperature sensor.
  • Tracks skin temperature
    This fitness tracker supports skin temperature tracking, while the average fitness tracker does not. 15.3% of fitness trackers support skin temperature tracking.
    Tracks skin temperature trends.
  • 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.
  • Water intake tracking
    This fitness tracker supports water intake tracking, while the average fitness tracker does not. 40.9% of fitness trackers support water intake tracking.
  • 3.5x cheaper
    Lava Befit is cheaper than the average fitness tracker (£20 vs £70).
    £20 vs £70
  • Built-in temperature sensor
    This fitness tracker has a temperature sensor, while the average fitness tracker does not. 13.4% of fitness trackers have a temperature sensor.
    Body temperature sensor.
  • Tracks skin temperature
    This fitness tracker supports skin temperature tracking, while the average fitness tracker does not. 15.3% of fitness trackers support skin temperature tracking.
    Tracks skin temperature trends.
  • Multi-sport mode
    This fitness tracker supports multi-sport mode, while the average fitness tracker does not. 14.5% of fitness trackers support multi-sport mode.
  • Tracks elevation
    This fitness tracker supports elevation tracking, while the average fitness tracker does not. 24.5% of fitness trackers support elevation tracking.
    Stair/elevation changes
  • 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
  • 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.
  • Modern Bluetooth version
    This fitness tracker supports a newer Bluetooth version than the average fitness tracker (5 vs 4.1). The average fitness tracker supports Bluetooth 4.1.
    5 vs 4.1
  • Camera remote control
    This fitness tracker supports camera remote control, while the average fitness tracker does not. 40.6% of fitness trackers support camera remote control.
  • 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.
  • Water intake tracking
    This fitness tracker supports water intake tracking, while the average fitness tracker does not. 40.9% of fitness trackers support water intake tracking.
  • No account required
    This fitness tracker works without an account, while the average fitness tracker does not. 9.8% of fitness trackers work without an account.
  • 4 days shorter battery life
    This fitness tracker has a lower battery life than the average fitness tracker (6 days vs 10 days). The average fitness tracker has 10 days of battery life.
    Standby claim also cited
    6 days vs 10 days
  • No shock resistance standard
    This fitness tracker meets a weaker shock resistance standard than the average fitness tracker (none vs MIL-STD-810H). The average fitness tracker meets the MIL-STD-810H shock resistance standard.
    none vs MIL-STD-810H
  • Lower screen resolution
    This fitness tracker has a lower screen resolution than the average fitness tracker (160x80 vs 194x368). The average fitness tracker has a screen resolution of 194x368.
    160x80 vs 194x368
  • 49 m lower waterproof depth rating
    This fitness tracker has a lower waterproof depth rating than the average fitness tracker (1 m vs 50 m). The average fitness tracker has a waterproof depth rating of 50 m.
    1 m vs 50 m
  • Limited ip rating
    This fitness tracker has a lower IP rating than the average fitness tracker (IP67 vs IP68). The average fitness tracker has an IP rating of IP68.
    IP67 vs IP68
  • 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.
  • 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
  • 4 days shorter battery life
    This fitness tracker has a lower battery life than the average fitness tracker (6 days vs 10 days). The average fitness tracker has 10 days of battery life.
    Standby claim also cited
    6 days vs 10 days
  • Lower screen resolution
    This fitness tracker has a lower screen resolution than the average fitness tracker (160x80 vs 194x368). The average fitness tracker has a screen resolution of 194x368.
    160x80 vs 194x368
  • No shock resistance standard
    This fitness tracker meets a weaker shock resistance standard than the average fitness tracker (none vs MIL-STD-810H). The average fitness tracker meets the MIL-STD-810H shock resistance standard.
    none vs MIL-STD-810H
  • 49 m lower waterproof depth rating
    This fitness tracker has a lower waterproof depth rating than the average fitness tracker (1 m vs 50 m). The average fitness tracker has a waterproof depth rating of 50 m.
    1 m vs 50 m
  • Limited ip rating
    This fitness tracker has a lower IP rating than the average fitness tracker (IP67 vs IP68). The average fitness tracker has an IP rating of IP68.
    IP67 vs IP68
  • 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 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

Not graded
Overview video
Overview video

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Lava Befit

  • Comprehensive health monitoring including heart rate, SpO2 (blood oxygen), and body temperature tracking
  • Excellent value for money, often cited as the best in its budget segment
  • Lightweight and sturdy build quality with a premium look and finish
  • Strong battery life, with users reporting it lasts up to a full week or more on a single charge
  • User-friendly app interface that supports Hindi language for better accessibility
  • Helpful social features like 'Be FIT Squad' for remotely monitoring family members' health data

What customers don't like about Lava Befit

  • Limited aesthetic variety with no additional color options available
  • Lack of built-in GPS, requiring a connected phone for accurate route tracking during outdoor activities
  • Inability to personalize the app's appearance (themes or colors)
  • Flimsy and short charging cable with weak magnetic connection that makes positioning difficult
  • Missing advanced features found in premium models, such as HRV (heart rate variability) tracking or smart alarms

Verdict

The Lava BeFIT is a budget-friendly fitness tracker featuring a 1.1-inch color LCD display with a 160 x 80 pixel resolution and a rectangular TPU design. It stands out with a comprehensive health suite that includes 24/7 heart rate monitoring, SpO2 blood oxygen levels, and an integrated body temperature sensor. Key characteristics include sleep and activity tracking, Bluetooth 5.0 connectivity for smartphone notifications (calls, SMS, social media), and an IP67 water resistance rating. Its main pros are the inclusion of specialized health sensors (temperature and SpO2) rarely found in its price bracket, a reliable battery life of up to 6 days, and a lightweight 25g build. On the downside, it lacks built-in GPS—relying on a connected smartphone for route tracking—and offers limited color options beyond basic black.

Compare Lava Befit 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 Lava Befit and other products in the Fitness trackers category

No results found