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

LG Lifeband Touch review: 163 specs compared

Avg. price:~£130Battery life:5 daysScreen size:0.91 inchHeart rate monitor:noGPS:noWaterproof depth rating:?

LG Lifeband Touch Review: Compare 163 technical specifications and 15 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Fitness trackers category and whether it is worth buying.

LG Lifeband Touch
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 89% of models
Score components

35%

6.1

Technical score

30%

?

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

25%

6.1

Reviews score

10%

?

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

▼Worse than 89% 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%

9.8

Price

▼Worse than 92%
6.1

Technical score

Technical score
6.1/ 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 87% of models
Score components

20%

7.2

Sports

20%

3.8

Battery

18%

4.0

Health

18%

7.2

Display

8%

7.4

Smart functions

8%

9.1

Wellness

4%

7.8

Connectivity

4%

6.2

Design

▼Worse than 87%
6.1

Reviews score

Reviews score
6.1/ 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 91% of models

6.1

Mark 6.8 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

6.6

Average grade

20%

7.7

Popularity

Grades by review (15)
12 reviews: 4 with a printed score, 8 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.
▼Worse than 91%
?

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
  • lg-lifeband-touch
  • lg-lifeband-touch
  • lg-lifeband-touch
  • lg-lifeband-touch
  • lg-lifeband-touch
  • lg-lifeband-touch
lg-lifeband-touch
lg-lifeband-touch
lg-lifeband-touch
lg-lifeband-touch
lg-lifeband-touch
lg-lifeband-touch
Where to buy
    N/A~ £130
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 LG Lifeband Touch

Based on 10 · 3

Reviewers like the controls and handy alarms, but the display and water resistance disappoint, and battery opinions are split.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of fitness tracker LG Lifeband Touch

Technical score
Technical score
6.1/ 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 87% of models
Score components:

20%

7.2

Sports

20%

3.8

Battery

18%

4.0

Health

18%

7.2

Display

8%

7.4

Smart functions

8%

9.1

Wellness

4%

7.8

Connectivity

4%

6.2

Design

6.1
Reviews score
6.1
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%

9.8

Price

7.6
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
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.
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
yes
This fitness tracker supports call controls. 59.7% of fitness trackers support call controls.
Reject/mute only.
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.
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
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
9.1 m
Market range: <9 m – >30 m
This fitness tracker offers a Bluetooth range of 9.1 m which is lower than that of 85.8% of fitness trackers and equal to that of 2.1% of fitness trackers.
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
5 days
Market range: <5 days – >180 days
This fitness tracker offers a battery life of 5 days which is shorter than that of 81.6% of fitness trackers and equal to that of 11% of fitness trackers.
About 2-3 days with Bluetooth link active.
Battery life with GPS on
N/A
Battery life in training mode
?
Power-saving battery life
?
Battery capacity
90 mAh
Market range: <45 mAh – >225 mAh
This fitness tracker has a battery capacity of 90 mAh which is lower than that of 68.2% of fitness trackers and equal to that of 4.7% 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
0.91 inch
Market range: <0.72 inch – >1.6 inch
This fitness tracker has a screen size of 0.91 inch which is smaller than that of 72.2% of fitness trackers and equal to that of 3.2% of fitness trackers.
Display type
OLED
This fitness tracker uses OLED display technology which is more advanced than that of 54.6% of fitness trackers and the same as that of 19.1% of fitness trackers.
Screen resolution
128x 32
This fitness tracker has a screen resolution of 128x32 which is lower than that of 50.5% of fitness trackers and equal to that of 8.2% of fitness trackers.
Pixel density
145 ppi
Market range: <146 ppi – >326 ppi
This fitness tracker has a pixel density of 145 ppi which is lower than that of 92.3% of fitness trackers and equal to that of 2.6% of fitness trackers.
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
no
This fitness tracker does not have a replaceable watch band. 77.1% of fitness trackers have a replaceable watch band.
Band width
?
Show more
What reviewers say

LG Lifeband Touch vs the average fitness tracker

246810TotalHealthSportsBatteryDisplayConnectivitySmart functionsDesignWellness
  • Always-on display
    This fitness tracker has an always-on display, while the average fitness tracker does not. 25.6% of fitness trackers have an always-on display.
  • Touchscreen
    This fitness tracker has a touchscreen, while the average fitness tracker does not. 46.7% of fitness trackers have a touchscreen.
  • Tracks elevation
    This fitness tracker supports elevation tracking, while the average fitness tracker does not. 24.5% of fitness trackers support elevation tracking.
    Ascent/descent via built-in altimeter
  • Call control
    This fitness tracker supports call controls, while the average fitness tracker does not. 40.6% of fitness trackers support call controls.
    Reject/mute only.
  • Works with external heart rate monitors
    This fitness tracker is compatible with external heart rate monitors, while the average fitness tracker is not. 5% of fitness trackers are compatible with external heart rate monitors.
    Works with LG HRM Earphones and Bluetooth chest straps.
  • 31.33 mm lower height
    This fitness tracker is shorter than the average fitness tracker (10 mm vs 41.3 mm). The average fitness tracker has a height of 41.325 mm.
    10 mm vs 41.325 mm
  • Gesture control
    This fitness tracker supports gesture controls, while the average fitness tracker does not. 39.6% of fitness trackers support gesture controls.
  • 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
  • Tracks elevation
    This fitness tracker supports elevation tracking, while the average fitness tracker does not. 24.5% of fitness trackers support elevation tracking.
    Ascent/descent via built-in altimeter
  • Works with external heart rate monitors
    This fitness tracker is compatible with external heart rate monitors, while the average fitness tracker is not. 5% of fitness trackers are compatible with external heart rate monitors.
    Works with LG HRM Earphones and Bluetooth chest straps.
  • Always-on display
    This fitness tracker has an always-on display, while the average fitness tracker does not. 25.6% of fitness trackers have an always-on display.
  • Touchscreen
    This fitness tracker has a touchscreen, while the average fitness tracker does not. 46.7% of fitness trackers have a touchscreen.
  • Call control
    This fitness tracker supports call controls, while the average fitness tracker does not. 40.6% of fitness trackers support call controls.
    Reject/mute only.
  • 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
  • Gesture control
    This fitness tracker supports gesture controls, while the average fitness tracker does not. 39.6% of fitness trackers support gesture controls.
  • 31.33 mm lower height
    This fitness tracker is shorter than the average fitness tracker (10 mm vs 41.3 mm). The average fitness tracker has a height of 41.325 mm.
    10 mm vs 41.325 mm
  • 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.
  • Lower screen resolution
    This fitness tracker has a lower screen resolution than the average fitness tracker (128x32 vs 194x368). The average fitness tracker has a screen resolution of 194x368.
    128x32 vs 194x368
  • 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.
  • 5 days shorter battery life
    This fitness tracker has a lower battery life than the average fitness tracker (5 days vs 10 days). The average fitness tracker has 10 days of battery life.
    About 2-3 days with Bluetooth link active.
    5 days vs 10 days
  • No sleep tracking
    This fitness tracker does not support sleep tracking, while the average fitness tracker does. 92.9% of fitness trackers support sleep tracking.
  • 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
  • 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.
  • 16.4% lower review score
    Reviews score
    6.1/ 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 91% of models

    6.1

    Mark 6.8 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    6.6

    Average grade

    20%

    7.7

    Popularity

    Grades by review (15)
    12 reviews: 4 with a printed score, 8 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.
    6.1 vs 7.3
  • 6.3% worse value for money
    LG Lifeband Touch has a lower value-for-money score than the average fitness tracker (7.59 vs 8.1).
    7.59 vs 8.07
  • 85.7% more expensive
    LG Lifeband Touch is more expensive than the average fitness tracker (£130 vs £70).
    £130 vs £70
  • 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 sleep tracking
    This fitness tracker does not support sleep tracking, while the average fitness tracker does. 92.9% of fitness trackers support sleep tracking.
  • 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 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.
  • 5 days shorter battery life
    This fitness tracker has a lower battery life than the average fitness tracker (5 days vs 10 days). The average fitness tracker has 10 days of battery life.
    About 2-3 days with Bluetooth link active.
    5 days vs 10 days
  • 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.
    2 hours vs 1.5 hours
  • 28% smaller battery capacity
    This fitness tracker has a lower battery capacity than the average fitness tracker (90 mAh vs 125 mAh). The average fitness tracker has 125 mAh of battery capacity.
    90 mAh vs 125 mAh
  • Lower screen resolution
    This fitness tracker has a lower screen resolution than the average fitness tracker (128x32 vs 194x368). The average fitness tracker has a screen resolution of 194x368.
    128x32 vs 194x368
  • 41.3% lower pixel density
    This fitness tracker has a lower pixel density than the average fitness tracker (145 ppi vs 247 ppi). The average fitness tracker has a pixel density of 247 ppi.
    145 ppi vs 247 ppi
  • 0.15 inch smaller screen size
    This fitness tracker has a lower screen size than the average fitness tracker (0.9 inch vs 1.06 inch). The average fitness tracker has a screen size of 1.06 inch.
    0.91 inch vs 1.06 inch
  • 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
  • 0.9 m shorter Bluetooth range
    This fitness tracker has a shorter Bluetooth range than the average fitness tracker (9.1 m vs 10 m). The average fitness tracker offers a Bluetooth range of 10 m.
    9.1 m vs 10 m
  • 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 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
  • 2.08x heavier
    This fitness tracker is heavier than the average fitness tracker (49.9 g vs 24 g). The average fitness tracker weighs 24 g.
    Medium size; larger sizes weigh slightly more.
    49.9 g vs 24 g
  • 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.
  • 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 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

5.0
CNET
≈ estimated
18/06/2014
Hands-on review · band and heart rate earphones test
Verdict
LG Lifeband Touch is a small step with a useful app, but it is expensive, has limited phone support and is not futuristic enough.
6.0
Pocketnow
≈ estimated
09/01/2014
First look · CES booth demo of menus and timer
Verdict
LG Lifeband Touch has very basic functionality, similar to competing bands, with price and launch still unknown.
Hands-on video, no verdict
Hands-on video, no verdict
Overview video
Overview video
Hands-on video, no verdict
Overview video
Hands-on video, no verdict

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

6.3
cnet.com
✓ explicit
18/06/2014
Hands-on review · Fitness band
Verdict
The LG Lifeband Touch is a mixed bag: its app and optional heart-rate earphones help, but a short battery and a confusing touchscreen let it down.
5.0
gadfit.com
≈ estimated
13/08/2014
Hands-on review · Band fit
Verdict
The LG Lifeband Touch looks slick and offers music control and phone alerts, but its rigid band bounced on the wrist and the app is hard to use.
2.9
gadgetguy.com.au
✓ explicit
16/06/2014
Hands-on review · Smartwatch mix
Verdict
The LG Lifeband Touch blends activity tracking with phone control, but its non-adjustable band barely holds on and pairing can stall.
5.0
gadfit.com
≈ estimated
13/08/2014
Hands-on review · Activity tracker
Verdict
The LG Lifeband Touch looks good, but its rigid band bounces around the wrist during runs and the app is hard to navigate.
6.0
rund-ums-rad.info
≈ estimated
01/12/2014
Practical test · Walking focus
Verdict
The LG Lifeband Touch is a readable step tracker for walking and running, but it's not waterproof, isn't suited to cycling and doesn't learn your habits.
5.0
netzwelt.de
✓ explicit
08/08/2014
Hands-on test · Smartwatch-style tracker
Verdict
The LG Lifeband Touch is a good all-rounder that counts steps fairly accurately and works with several heart-rate straps, but its bulky band fits only some wrists.
6.0
teltarif.de
≈ estimated
04/07/2014
Hands-on test · Fitness band
Verdict
The LG Lifeband Touch is only a middling fitness tracker, with step counts that drift and a display that is hard to read in strong sun.
8.0
teknikop.com
≈ estimated
27/07/2014
Hands-on review · Design and music
Verdict
The LG Lifeband Touch has a distinctive design and handy music controls, but it skips sleep tracking and is hard to read in sunlight.
7.0
xataka.com
≈ estimated
29/07/2014
Full review · Design and app
Verdict
The LG Lifeband Touch has a comfortable, semi-rigid design and a simple touch screen, but it's hard to read in sunlight, not waterproof and can't record sleep.
5.0
lasexta.com
≈ estimated
18/07/2014
Hands-on review · Fitness band
Verdict
The LG Lifeband Touch has a good-looking design and a battery that lasts six days if you sync only once a day, but its screen is unreadable outdoors.
7.6
computerhoy.20minutos.es
✓ explicit
25/08/2014
Hands-on review · Fitness band
Verdict
The LG Lifeband Touch has a good-looking design and a battery that lasts six days if you sync each night, but its screen is unreadable outdoors.
6.0
moviltoday.com
≈ estimated
10/07/2014
Quick review · Fitness band
Verdict
The LG Lifeband Touch is comfortable and splash-resistant, with good alerts and music control, but its screen is hard to read in sunlight.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about LG Lifeband Touch

  • Sleek and stylish bracelet-like design
  • Bright OLED touchscreen for easy navigation indoors
  • Useful smartphone integration for call and message notifications
  • Tracks basic metrics like steps, calories, distance, and speed effectively
  • Compatible with both iOS and Android platforms
  • Syncs with popular third-party apps like MyFitnessPal and RunKeeper

What customers don't like about LG Lifeband Touch

  • OLED display is very difficult to read in direct sunlight
  • Rigid, non-adjustable band design can lead to an uncomfortable or loose fit
  • Lacks a built-in heart rate monitor (requires separate expensive earphones)
  • Battery life is relatively short, especially during heavy activity tracking
  • Heavier and bulkier compared to many competing fitness trackers
  • Limited notification functionality when paired with iOS devices
  • Proprietary charging dock can be fiddly and easily disconnected

Verdict

The LG Lifeband Touch is a wearable fitness tracker featuring a 0.91-inch OLED monochrome touchscreen with a 128 x 32 resolution, powered by a 90mAh battery that offers approximately two to five days of life. It utilizes a 3-axis accelerometer and an altimeter to track steps, distance, speed, and calories, and can pair with specialized heart-rate monitor earphones via Bluetooth 4.0. Main characteristics include its sleek, clasp-less rigid band design, music playback controls, and smartphone notifications for calls and messages on both Android and iOS. Its primary pros are its broad compatibility with third-party apps like Runkeeper and MyFitnessPal, as well as its intuitive gesture-based display activation. However, notable cons include a screen that is nearly unreadable in direct sunlight, a bulky and non-adjustable fit, and limited notification functionality when paired specifically with iPhones.

Compare LG Lifeband Touch 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 LG Lifeband Touch and other products in the Fitness trackers category

No results found