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

Polar A370 Review | 171 Data compared

Avg. price:~£130Battery life:4 daysScreen size:1.18 inchHeart rate monitor:yesGPS:noWaterproof depth rating:30 m

Polar A370 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.

7.1

Overall score

Score
7.1/ 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%

6.8

Technical score

20%

8.1

User score

▲Better than 52% of fitness-trackers
6.8

Technical score

Technical score
6.8/ 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%

7.8

Sports & Navigation

20%

3.5

Battery

18%

7.1

Health

18%

7.1

Display

8%

7.3

Smart Features

8%

9.4

App & Wellness

4%

8.9

Connectivity

4%

6.7

Design & Durability

▼Worse than 58% of fitness-trackers
8.1

User score

User score
8.1/ 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%

8.2

User ratings

30%

7.9

Number of reviews

Based on 1,471 buyer reviews from online shops.
How we calculate this
User ratings – average star rating across all shop listings, weighted by how many reviews each has, on a 1–10 scale.
Number of reviews – how many buyer reviews the product has, on a logarithmic scale; the 8% most-reviewed models in the category get 10.
▲Better than 72% of fitness-trackers
  • polar-a370
polar-a370

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 Polar A370

Technical score
Technical score
6.8/ 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%

7.8

Sports & Navigation

20%

3.5

Battery

18%

7.1

Health

18%

7.1

Display

8%

7.3

Smart Features

8%

9.4

App & Wellness

4%

8.9

Connectivity

4%

6.7

Design & Durability

6.8
User score
User score
8.1/ 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%

8.2

User ratings

30%

7.9

Number of reviews

Based on 1,471 buyer reviews from online shops.
How we calculate this
User ratings – average star rating across all shop listings, weighted by how many reviews each has, on a 1–10 scale.
Number of reviews – how many buyer reviews the product has, on a logarithmic scale; the 8% most-reviewed models in the category get 10.
8.1
Popularity
Popularity
7.9/ 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:
Polar A370 has a popularity score of 7.9 points, which is higher than 67.1% of fitness trackers.
7.9
Value for money
Value for money
7.9/ 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%

7.1

Overall score

40%

9.8

Price

7.9
Heart rate monitor
yes
Heart rate monitor
yes
This fitness tracker supports heart rate monitoring. 40.2% of fitness trackers support heart rate monitoring.
Resting heart rate
yes
Resting heart rate
yes
This fitness tracker supports Resting heart rate. 52.6% 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
no
Satellite systems supported
no
This fitness tracker supports no satellite systems which is less versatile than that of 12.2% of fitness trackers and the same as that of 87.8% of fitness trackers.
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
yes
Notifications
yes
This fitness tracker supports notifications. 27.5% of fitness trackers support notifications.
Vibrating alerts
yes
Vibrating alerts
yes
This fitness tracker supports vibration alerts. 16.3% of fitness trackers support vibration alerts.
Call control
yes
Call control
yes
This fitness tracker supports call controls. 58.7% of fitness trackers support call controls.
Accept/reject on the tracker; audio stays on the phone.
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.
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
yes
Inactivity alerts
yes
This fitness tracker supports inactivity alerts. 23.5% of fitness trackers support inactivity alerts.
Coaching
yes
Coaching
yes
This fitness tracker supports coaching. 66.5% of fitness trackers support coaching.
Smart Coach support.
Show more
Bluetooth version
?
Maximum Bluetooth range
?
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
13 h
Battery life in training mode
13 h
This fitness tracker offers a training-mode battery life of 13 h which is longer than that of 67.9% of fitness trackers.
With mobile GPS on.
Battery life in power-saving mode
?
Battery capacity
100 mAh
Battery capacity
100 mAh
This fitness tracker has a battery capacity of 100 mAh which is lower than that of 54% of fitness trackers and equal to that of 9.2% of fitness trackers.
Show more
Display
yes
Display
yes
This fitness tracker has a display. 24.1% of fitness trackers have a display.
Screen size
1.18 inch
Screen size
1.18 inch
This fitness tracker has a screen size of 1.18 inch which is larger than that of 61.5% of fitness trackers and equal to that of 0.7% of fitness trackers.
Display type
TFT LCD
Display type
TFT LCD
This fitness tracker uses TFT LCD display technology which is less advanced than that of 62.1% of fitness trackers and the same as that of 5.6% of fitness trackers.
Screen resolution
80x 160
Screen resolution
80x 160
This fitness tracker has a screen resolution of 80x160 which is higher than that of 61.9% of fitness trackers and equal to that of 2.3% of fitness trackers.
Pixel density
?
Show more
Form factor
wristband
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
23 mm
Show more

Polar A370 vs the average fitness tracker

246810TotalHealthSports & NavigationBatteryDisplayConnectivitySmart FeaturesDesign & DurabilityApp & Wellness
  • Lower resting heart rate
    Resting heart rate
    yes
    This fitness tracker supports Resting heart rate, while the average fitness tracker does not. 47.7% of fitness trackers support Resting heart rate.
  • Touchscreen
    Touchscreen
    yes
    This fitness tracker has a touchscreen, while the average fitness tracker does not. 43.8% of fitness trackers have a touchscreen.
  • Auto pause
    Auto pause
    yes
    This fitness tracker supports auto pause, while the average fitness tracker does not. 23.2% of fitness trackers support auto pause.
    Available through Polar Flow sport-profile settings for supported GPS workouts.
  • Coaching features
    Coaching
    yes
    This fitness tracker supports coaching, while the average fitness tracker does not. 33.8% of fitness trackers support coaching.
    Smart Coach support.
  • Tracks elevation
    Elevation tracking
    yes
    This fitness tracker supports elevation tracking, while the average fitness tracker does not. 27.4% of fitness trackers support elevation tracking.
    Altitude via connected GPS
  • Color display
    Color display
    yes
    This fitness tracker has a color display, while the average fitness tracker does not. 37.7% of fitness trackers have a color display.
  • Call control
    Call control
    yes
    This fitness tracker supports call controls, while the average fitness tracker does not. 41.5% of fitness trackers support call controls.
    Accept/reject on the tracker; audio stays on the phone.
  • 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 Polar FlowSync.
  • 1.4% higher user score
    User score
    8.1/ 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
    Polar A370
    the average fitness tracker
    Polar A370 has a higher user score than the average fitness tracker (8.11 vs 8.000).
    8.11 vs 8
  • Lower resting heart rate
    Resting heart rate
    yes
    This fitness tracker supports Resting heart rate, while the average fitness tracker does not. 47.7% of fitness trackers support Resting heart rate.
  • 5 h longer training-mode battery life
    Battery life in training mode
    13 h
    This fitness tracker has a higher battery life in training mode than the average fitness tracker (13 h vs 8 h). The average fitness tracker has 8 h of battery life in training mode.
    With mobile GPS on.
    13 h vs 8 h
  • Touchscreen
    Touchscreen
    yes
    This fitness tracker has a touchscreen, while the average fitness tracker does not. 43.8% of fitness trackers have a touchscreen.
  • Color display
    Color display
    yes
    This fitness tracker has a color display, while the average fitness tracker does not. 37.7% of fitness trackers have a color display.
  • 0.14 inch larger screen size
    Screen size
    1.18 inch
    This fitness tracker has a higher screen size than the average fitness tracker (1.2 inch vs 1.04 inch). The average fitness tracker has a screen size of 1.04 inch.
    1.18 inch vs 1.04 inch
  • 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 Polar FlowSync.
  • 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 Polar FlowSync.
  • Call control
    Call control
    yes
    This fitness tracker supports call controls, while the average fitness tracker does not. 41.5% of fitness trackers support call controls.
    Accept/reject on the tracker; audio stays on the phone.
  • 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
  • Firmware update method
    Firmware update method
    over-the-air / USB
    This fitness tracker uses a more convenient firmware update method than the average fitness tracker (over-the-air / USB vs over-the-air). The average fitness tracker uses over-the-air for firmware updates.
    over-the-air / USB vs over-the-air
  • Gesture control
    Gesture control
    yes
    This fitness tracker supports gesture controls, while the average fitness tracker does not. 40.8% of fitness trackers support gesture controls.
  • 27.8 mm lower height
    Height
    13 mm
    This fitness tracker is shorter than the average fitness tracker (13 mm vs 40.8 mm). The average fitness tracker has a height of 40.8 mm.
    Watch case height.
    13 mm vs 40.8 mm
  • Coaching features
    Coaching
    yes
    This fitness tracker supports coaching, while the average fitness tracker does not. 33.8% of fitness trackers support coaching.
    Smart Coach support.
  • Available on PC
    Available on PC
    yes
    This fitness tracker is available on PC, while the average fitness tracker is not. 18.1% of fitness trackers are available on PC.
    Web dashboard available.
  • Ad-free
    Free app
    yes
    This fitness tracker has an ad-free app, while the average fitness tracker does not. 48.1% of fitness trackers have an ad-free app.
  • 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.
  • Lower screen resolution
    Screen resolution
    80 x 160
    This fitness tracker has a lower screen resolution than the average fitness tracker (80x160 vs 194x368). The average fitness tracker has a screen resolution of 194x368.
    80x160 vs 194x368
  • 0.5 hours longer charging time
    Charging time
    2 hours
    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
  • Limited ip rating
    IP rating
    IPX7
    This fitness tracker has a lower IP rating than the average fitness tracker (IPX7 vs IP68). The average fitness tracker has an IP rating of IP68.
    IPX7 vs IP68
  • 2 ATM lower water resistance rating
    ATM rating
    3 ATM
    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
  • 26.8% heavier
    Thickness
    31.7 g mm
    This fitness tracker is heavier than the average fitness tracker (31.7 g vs 25 g). The average fitness tracker weighs 25 g.
    Small size; Medium/Large is 37 g.
    31.7 g vs 25 g
  • 20 m lower waterproof depth rating
    Waterproof depth rating
    30 m
    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
  • 85.7% more expensive
    Polar A370 is more expensive than the average fitness tracker (£130 vs £70).
    £130 vs £70
  • 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
  • 0.5 hours longer charging time
    Charging time
    2 hours
    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
  • 9.1% smaller battery capacity
    Battery capacity
    100 mAh
    This fitness tracker has a lower battery capacity than the average fitness tracker (100 mAh vs 110 mAh). The average fitness tracker has 110 mAh of battery capacity.
    100 mAh vs 110 mAh
  • Lower screen resolution
    Screen resolution
    80 x 160
    This fitness tracker has a lower screen resolution than the average fitness tracker (80x160 vs 194x368). The average fitness tracker has a screen resolution of 194x368.
    80x160 vs 194x368
  • 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 ip rating
    IP rating
    IPX7
    This fitness tracker has a lower IP rating than the average fitness tracker (IPX7 vs IP68). The average fitness tracker has an IP rating of IP68.
    IPX7 vs IP68
  • 2 ATM lower water resistance rating
    ATM rating
    3 ATM
    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
  • 26.8% heavier
    Thickness
    31.7 g mm
    This fitness tracker is heavier than the average fitness tracker (31.7 g vs 25 g). The average fitness tracker weighs 25 g.
    Small size; Medium/Large is 37 g.
    31.7 g vs 25 g
  • 20 m lower waterproof depth rating
    Waterproof depth rating
    30 m
    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
  • 2.5 mm thicker design
    Thickness
    13.5 mm
    This fitness tracker is thicker than the average fitness tracker (13.5 mm vs 11 mm). The average fitness tracker has a thickness of 11 mm.
    13.5 mm vs 11 mm
  • 10 °C higher minimum operating temperature
    Min operating temperature
    -10 °C
    This fitness tracker has a higher minimum operating temperature than the average fitness tracker (-10 °C vs 0 °C). The average fitness tracker supports a minimum operating temperature of 0 °C.
    -10 °C vs 0 °C

Video reviews

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

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

I
iot-tests.org
23/08/2018
Summary of the review
G
gearinstitute.com
31/01/2018
Summary of the review
T
the5krunner.com
03/11/2017
Summary of the review
T
techradar.com
21/08/2017
Summary of the review
W
wareable.com
02/08/2017
Summary of the review
D
dcrainmaker.com
07/06/2017
Summary of the review
T
tomsguide.com
03/07/2017
Summary of the review
E
expertreviews.co.uk
29/11/2018
Summary of the review
P
pcmag.com
27/11/2018
Summary of the review
C
computerbild.de
16/11/2017
Summary of the review
C
chip.de
10/08/2017
Summary of the review
I
iot-tests.org
23/08/2018
Summary of the review
E
elternplanet.ch
23/03/2018
Summary of the review
H
hifitest.de
12/05/2018
Summary of the review
F
fitnessmodern.de
05/06/2018
Summary of the review
N
netzwelt.de
04/08/2019
Summary of the review
H
heise.de
12/06/2019
Summary of the review
R
rotek.fr
28/04/2018
Summary of the review
W
watchgeneration.fr
18/03/2018
Summary of the review
T
tomsguide.fr
04/09/2017
Summary of the review
L
lesnumeriques.com
17/06/2017
Summary of the review
R
runnea.com
N/D
Summary of the review
L
labolsadelcorredor.com
24/05/2017
Summary of the review
T
test-aankoop.be
[No date provided]
Summary of the review
F
fitgirlcode.nl
12/09/2017
Summary of the review
G
gymjunkies.nl
30/11/2017
Summary of the review

Third-party reviews

Based on 1,471 buyer reviews from online shops.
Reviews last updated: June 2026 · How we calculate this

What we like about Polar A370

  • High-quality color touchscreen with good outdoor visibility
  • Continuous and accurate heart rate monitoring for high-intensity workouts
  • Excellent sleep tracking through the 'Sleep Plus' intelligence system
  • Waterproof design suitable for swimming
  • Comprehensive data analysis via the Polar Flow smartphone app
  • Customizable training programs and inactivity alerts

What we don't like about Polar A370

  • Poor battery life, often lasting only 2 days with all features enabled
  • Lacks built-in GPS, requiring a tethered smartphone for route mapping
  • Chunky and bulky design that can be uncomfortable for overnight wear
  • Low-resolution screen with visible pixelation
  • Screen is not 'always-on', requiring a button press or wrist flick to wake
  • Hit-or-miss smartphone connectivity and syncing issues

Verdict

The Polar A370 is a slim, waterproof fitness tracker featuring a 1.2-inch color TFT touchscreen with a resolution of 80x160 pixels and a rechargeable 110 mAh battery that provides up to 4 days of life. Key characteristics include 24/7 continuous wrist-based optical heart rate monitoring, advanced Polar Sleep Plus analytics for detailed sleep quality insights, and 3D accelerometer tracking for indoor activities. Main pros include its versatile ability to broadcast heart rate data to other Bluetooth devices, its integration with phone-based GPS for outdoor route mapping, and its comfortable, interchangeable silicone bands. However, notable cons include the lack of a built-in GPS sensor, a relatively short battery life compared to some competitors, and a display that lacks an always-on mode.

Compare Polar A370 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 Polar A370 and other products in the Fitness trackers category

No results found