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

Withings Pulse Ox review: 163 specs compared

Avg. price:~£110Battery life:14 daysScreen size:1 inchHeart rate monitor:yesGPS:noWaterproof depth rating:0 m

Withings Pulse Ox Review: Compare 163 technical specifications and 19 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Fitness trackers category and whether it is worth buying.

Withings Pulse Ox
7.2/10

Overall score

Score
7.2/ 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 56% of models
Score components

35%

7.1

Technical score

30%

?

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

25%

7.1

Reviews score

10%

?

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

▼Worse than 56% of fitness trackers
8.0

Value for money

Value for money
8.0/ 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 64% of models
Score components

70%

7.2

Overall score

30%

9.9

Price

▼Worse than 64%
7.1

Technical score

Technical score
7.1/ 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
▲ Better than 54% of models
Score components

20%

7.4

Sports

20%

6.1

Battery

18%

8.3

Health

18%

7.1

Display

8%

5.1

Smart functions

8%

8.4

Wellness

4%

7.2

Connectivity

4%

6.0

Design

▲Better than 54%
7.1

Reviews score

Reviews score
7.1/ 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 61% of models

7.1

Mark 7.4 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

7.3

Average grade

20%

7.9

Popularity

Grades by review (19)
17 reviews: 9 with a printed score, 8 estimated from the review. 2 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 61%
?

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
  • withings-pulse-o2
withings-pulse-o2
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 Withings Pulse Ox

Based on 10 · 2

Reviewers like the app, sleep tracking and battery, but slam the poor water resistance, unreliable heart rate and oxygen readings, and screen.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of fitness tracker Withings Pulse Ox

Technical score
Technical score
7.1/ 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
▲ Better than 54% of models
Score components:

20%

7.4

Sports

20%

6.1

Battery

18%

8.3

Health

18%

7.1

Display

8%

5.1

Smart functions

8%

8.4

Wellness

4%

7.2

Connectivity

4%

6.0

Design

7.1
Reviews score
7.1
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
8.0/ 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 64% of models
Score components:

70%

7.2

Overall score

30%

9.9

Price

8.0
Heart rate monitor
yes
This fitness tracker supports heart rate monitoring. 36.2% of fitness trackers support heart rate monitoring.
On-demand finger reading.
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
yes
This fitness tracker has a blood oxygen sensor. 68.2% of fitness trackers have a blood oxygen sensor.
On-demand finger reading.
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
no
This fitness tracker does not support notifications. 72.7% of fitness trackers support notifications.
Vibrating alerts
no
This fitness tracker does not support vibration alerts. 86.2% 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
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
What reviewers say
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
14 days
Market range: <5 days – >180 days
This fitness tracker offers a battery life of 14 days which is longer than that of 59.7% of fitness trackers and equal to that of 14.5% of fitness trackers.
Battery life with GPS on
N/A
Battery life in training mode
?
Power-saving battery life
N/A
Battery capacity
?
Show more
What reviewers say
Display
yes
This fitness tracker has a display. 26.3% of fitness trackers have a display.
Screen size
1 inch
Market range: <0.72 inch – >1.6 inch
This fitness tracker has a screen size of 1 inch which is smaller than that of 52.5% of fitness trackers and equal to that of 1.9% 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
128 ppi
Market range: <146 ppi – >326 ppi
This fitness tracker has a pixel density of 128 ppi which is lower than that of 96.6% of fitness trackers and equal to that of 0.9% of fitness trackers.
Calculated from published resolution and display size.
Show more
What reviewers say
Form factor
clip-on
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.
Band width
N/A
Show more
What reviewers say

Withings Pulse Ox vs the average fitness tracker

246810TotalHealthSportsBatteryDisplayConnectivitySmart functionsDesignWellness
  • Blood oxygen monitoring
    This fitness tracker has a blood oxygen sensor, while the average fitness tracker does not. 32.1% of fitness trackers have a blood oxygen sensor.
    On-demand finger reading.
  • 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.
  • 4 days longer battery life
    This fitness tracker has a higher battery life than the average fitness tracker (14 days vs 10 days). The average fitness tracker has 10 days of battery life.
    14 days vs 10 days
  • 66.7% lighter
    This fitness tracker is lighter than the average fitness tracker (8 g vs 24 g). The average fitness tracker weighs 24 g.
    Module weight only.
    8 g vs 24 g
  • Low power mode
    This fitness tracker supports low power mode, while the average fitness tracker does not. 23.2% of fitness trackers support low power mode.
    Includes a power save mode.
  • Tracks menstrual cycle
    This fitness tracker supports menstrual cycle tracking, while the average fitness tracker does not. 45.2% of fitness trackers support menstrual cycle tracking.
  • Blood oxygen monitoring
    This fitness tracker has a blood oxygen sensor, while the average fitness tracker does not. 32.1% of fitness trackers have a blood oxygen sensor.
    On-demand finger reading.
  • Tracks menstrual cycle
    This fitness tracker supports menstrual cycle tracking, while the average fitness tracker does not. 45.2% of fitness trackers support menstrual cycle tracking.
  • Period notifications
    This fitness tracker has period notifications, while the average fitness tracker does not. 34.6% of fitness trackers have period notifications.
  • Ovulation prediction
    This fitness tracker predicts ovulation, while the average fitness tracker does not. 44.1% of fitness trackers predict ovulation.
  • Tracks elevation
    This fitness tracker supports elevation tracking, while the average fitness tracker does not. 24.5% of fitness trackers support elevation tracking.
  • Built-in barometer
    This fitness tracker has a barometer, while the average fitness tracker does not. 10.4% of fitness trackers have a barometer.
  • 4 days longer battery life
    This fitness tracker has a higher battery life than the average fitness tracker (14 days vs 10 days). The average fitness tracker has 10 days of battery life.
    14 days vs 10 days
  • Low power mode
    This fitness tracker supports low power mode, while the average fitness tracker does not. 23.2% of fitness trackers support low power mode.
    Includes a power save mode.
  • 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.
  • 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
  • 66.7% lighter
    This fitness tracker is lighter than the average fitness tracker (8 g vs 24 g). The average fitness tracker weighs 24 g.
    Module weight only.
    8 g vs 24 g
  • 3 mm thinner design
    This fitness tracker is thinner than the average fitness tracker (8 mm vs 11 mm). The average fitness tracker has a thickness of 11 mm.
    8 mm vs 11 mm
  • 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.
  • 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
  • No pace measurement
    This fitness tracker does not support pace measurement, while the average fitness tracker does. 62.9% of fitness trackers support pace measurement.
  • No notifications
    This fitness tracker does not support notifications, while the average fitness tracker does. 72.3% of fitness trackers support notifications.
  • 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.
  • 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
  • 48.2% lower pixel density
    This fitness tracker has a lower pixel density than the average fitness tracker (128 ppi vs 247 ppi). The average fitness tracker has a pixel density of 247 ppi.
    Calculated from published resolution and display size.
    128 ppi vs 247 ppi
  • 50 m lower waterproof depth rating
    This fitness tracker has a lower waterproof depth rating than the average fitness tracker (0 m vs 50 m). The average fitness tracker has a waterproof depth rating of 50 m.
    Not waterproof.
    0 m vs 50 m
  • 57.1% more expensive
    Withings Pulse Ox is more expensive than the average fitness tracker (£110 vs £70).
    £110 vs £70
  • 2.7% lower review score
    Reviews score
    7.1/ 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 61% of models

    7.1

    Mark 7.4 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.3

    Average grade

    20%

    7.9

    Popularity

    Grades by review (19)
    17 reviews: 9 with a printed score, 8 estimated from the review. 2 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.
    7.1 vs 7.3
  • No pace measurement
    This fitness tracker does not support pace measurement, while the average fitness tracker does. 62.9% of fitness trackers support pace measurement.
  • 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.
  • 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
  • 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
  • 48.2% lower pixel density
    This fitness tracker has a lower pixel density than the average fitness tracker (128 ppi vs 247 ppi). The average fitness tracker has a pixel density of 247 ppi.
    Calculated from published resolution and display size.
    128 ppi vs 247 ppi
  • 0.06 inch smaller screen size
    This fitness tracker has a lower screen size than the average fitness tracker (1 inch vs 1.06 inch). The average fitness tracker has a screen size of 1.06 inch.
    1 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
  • No notifications
    This fitness tracker does not support notifications, while the average fitness tracker does. 72.3% of fitness trackers support notifications.
  • 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 vibrating alerts
    This fitness tracker does not support vibration alerts, while the average fitness tracker does. 85.8% of fitness trackers support vibration alerts.
  • 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
  • 50 m lower waterproof depth rating
    This fitness tracker has a lower waterproof depth rating than the average fitness tracker (0 m vs 50 m). The average fitness tracker has a waterproof depth rating of 50 m.
    Not waterproof.
    0 m vs 50 m
  • 5 ATM lower water resistance rating
    This fitness tracker has a lower ATM rating than the average fitness tracker (0 ATM vs 5 ATM). The average fitness tracker has an ATM rating of 5 ATM.
    Not waterproof.
    0 ATM vs 5 ATM
  • Low water resistance
    This fitness tracker is not water-resistant, while the average fitness tracker is. 99.1% of fitness trackers are water-resistant.
  • 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.

Video reviews

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

5.0
ChinskiChat
≈ estimated
01/07/2016
Comparison · heart rate accuracy and day-to-day use
Verdict
Withings Pulse Ox is less capable for heart rate monitoring, so the rival tracker is the better buy.
9.0
Mark J Draper
≈ estimated
23/05/2014
Quick look · device, syncing and app overview
Verdict
Withings Pulse Ox is a great little device with minor drawbacks: it isn't waterproof and doesn't detect sleep automatically.

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

8.0
cnet.com
✓ explicit
25/04/2014
Hands-on test · Wristband fitness tracker
Verdict
The Withings Pulse O2 is a wristband tracker that syncs easily and has a good app, but its screen is hard to read in sunlight and it isn't water-resistant.
6.0
pcmag.com
✓ explicit
30/04/2014
Hands-on test · Activity tracker
Verdict
The Withings Pulse O2 suits fairly inactive people who want steps and resting heart rate, but its heart rate readings are too patchy for workouts.
7.0
trustedreviews.com
✓ explicit
14/05/2014
Hands-on test · Fitness tracker
Verdict
The Withings Pulse O2 is a strong all-round tracker with good battery life and automatic run detection, but its design and screen let it down.
6.8
livescience.com
✓ explicit
16/05/2014
Hands-on test · Wrist or clip tracker
Verdict
The Withings Pulse O2 is a light tracker you can wear on the wrist, belt or in a pocket, but heart rate checks are hard to do during exercise.
6.0
coachweb.com
✓ explicit
27/05/2014
Hands-on test · Activity tracker
Verdict
The Withings Pulse O2 is a simple tracker for people becoming more active, with close to two weeks of battery, but its pulse sensor often fails.
8.0
digitaltrends.com
✓ explicit
23/08/2019
Hands-on review · Wrist or clip tracker
Verdict
The Withings Pulse O2 suits people who want a full-featured app with a heart-rate and blood-oxygen sensor, though its wrist strap lets the module slip.
6.0
gadgetsandwearables.com
✓ explicit
20/01/2015
Hands-on review · Battery-focused tracker
Verdict
The Withings Pulse O2 is a solid, long-lasting tracker with a useful app, but its dated design and lack of water resistance hold it back.
5.0
ibtimes.com
≈ estimated
11/12/2014
Hands-on test · Step tracker
Verdict
The Withings Pulse O2 is a capable step counter with a strong app, but its unreliable hardware and unreadable sunlight screen make it hard to recommend for daily use.
9.0
the-gadgeteer.com
≈ estimated
25/04/2014
Hands-on test · Activity tracker
Verdict
The Withings Pulse O2 is the original Pulse's hardware with a new silicone wristband and blood oxygen readings, and it remains a strong everyday tracker.
7.0
pcwelt.de
✓ explicit
08/07/2014
Hands-on test · Everyday tracker
Verdict
The Withings Pulse O2 is a good everyday step counter with a strong app, but its finger pulse check is fiddly and it is not built for sport.
7.0
macwelt.de
✓ explicit
03/07/2014
Multi-week test · Everyday tracker
Verdict
The Withings Pulse O2 tracks daily steps well and has a strong app, but its finger pulse check is awkward and unsuited to sport.
8.0
apfelpage.de
≈ estimated
04/07/2014
Short test · Activity tracker
Verdict
The Withings Pulse O2 is a light, simple tracker that suits iPhone users, but it is not waterproof and its screen is hard to read in sunlight.
7.0
stuffi.fr
≈ estimated
05/08/2014
Long-term test · Jawbone comparison
Verdict
The Withings Pulse O2 shows live numbers on screen and detects waking automatically, but its thick band makes it hard to wear with a watch.
9.0
unmondedaventures.fr
≈ estimated
26/07/2014
One-week test · Daily tracking
Verdict
The Withings Pulse O2 is a light, simple tracker that encourages walking and sleep, but it is not waterproof and needs daily syncing.
8.0
endomorfun.fr
≈ estimated
04/12/2013
Personal review · Activity tracker
Verdict
The Withings Pulse is a small, comfortable tracker that handles steps and sleep well, though its distance and altitude readings are only rough guides.
5.0
frandroid.com
≈ estimated
22/06/2014
Hands-on test · Wristband tracker
Verdict
The Withings Pulse O2 suits all-day wear on the wrist, but the wristband slips, the screen is dim and it is not waterproof.
9.0
dday.it
≈ estimated
22/07/2014
Hands-on test · Health Mate ecosystem
Verdict
The Withings Pulse O2 is a simple tracker lasting about two weeks, but its small screen is hard to read in sunlight and setup relies on the app.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Withings Pulse Ox

  • Versatile wearing options (can be worn on the wrist, clipped to a belt, or placed in a pocket)
  • Long battery life, typically lasting between 7 to 14 days on a single charge
  • Comprehensive health ecosystem with an excellent and detailed companion app (Health Mate)
  • Unique blood oxygen (SpO2) and heart rate monitoring for its price point
  • Lightweight and unobtrusive design, weighing only 8 grams

What customers don't like about Withings Pulse Ox

  • Not water-resistant, making it vulnerable to sweat, rain, or accidental submersion
  • OLED screen is virtually unreadable in direct sunlight or bright daylight
  • Heart rate monitoring is not continuous and requires removing the device from the wristband to use the sensor
  • Questionable build quality with soft materials that scuff easily
  • Occasional syncing issues and lack of compatibility with Windows or Mac

Verdict

The Withings Pulse Ox is a versatile 8-gram fitness tracker featuring a 1.28 x 0.32-inch OLED touchscreen and a 3-axis accelerometer to monitor steps, elevation, distance, and calories. Its key characteristic is the rear optical sensor that measures both heart rate and blood oxygen (SpO2) levels via finger placement. Main pros include its dual-wear design (wristband or belt clip), a long 14-day battery life with micro-USB charging, and seamless Bluetooth syncing with the Health Mate app. However, it is not water-resistant, the screen can be difficult to read in direct sunlight, and checking vitals requires manually removing the device from its strap or clip.

Compare Withings Pulse Ox 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 Withings Pulse Ox and other products in the Fitness trackers category

No results found