OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Smartwatches Methodology v2.0
Smartwatches Methodology v2.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontumo Smartwatches Methodology v2.0: technical specifications plus grades from 3,488 independent expert reviews and 5,192 video reviews, with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Smartwatches Methodology v2.0

Fitbit Versa Lite Review | 126 Data compared

Avg. price:~£120Screen size:1.34 inchBattery life:4 daysDisplay type:LCD

Fitbit Versa Lite Review: Compare 126 technical specifications and 20 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Smartwatches category and whether it is worth buying.

5.8

Overall score

Score
5.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the smartwatch's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best smartwatches on the market.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 81% of models
Score components

70%

5.0

Technical score

30%

7.7

Review score ( 8 · 12)

Review score 30% · 7.7 · based on 20 independent reviews
Every model in this category gets the same split: reviews 30%, technical score 70%. This model has enough reviews, so its review score is the weighted average of their grades. 24 more reviews are not scored yet.
â–¼Worse than 81% of smartwatches
5.0

Technical score

Technical score
5.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the smartwatchx27s technical performance, covering seven key areas: health, fitness, display & design, hardware, battery, smart features and connectivity.
When it matters
When you want to compare smartwatches based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 86% of models
Score components

24%

6.4

Health

21%

6.4

Fitness

16%

3.0

Battery

14%

4.8

Smart features

12%

2.4

Connectivity

9%

6.6

Display & Design

4%

3.6

Hardware

â–¼Worse than 86% of smartwatches
7.7

Review score

Review score
7.7/ 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.
Weighting: Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Share: Reviews are 30% of the overall score for every model in this category; each of the 5 needed reviews that is missing counts as 7/10.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
Grades by review (20)
Text reviews 4
✓ explicit
4

8.8%

8.0

techradar.com

8.8%

8.0

expertreviews.co.uk

8.8%

7.0

tomsguide.com

8.8%

7.0

techadvisor.com

Video reviews 4

3.5%

9.0

Hayls World

3.5%

4.0

Engadget

1.8%

8.0

Team VRY

1.8%

7.0

DC Rainmaker

estimated from the review
8 reviews: 6 with a printed score, 2 estimated from the review. 12 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Share in the overall score: 30%, the same for every model in this category.
Shop star ratings are not part of this score.
â–¼Worse than 51% of smartwatches
  • fitbit-versa-lite
  • fitbit-versa-lite
  • fitbit-versa-lite
  • fitbit-versa-lite
  • fitbit-versa-lite
  • fitbit-versa-lite
fitbit-versa-lite
fitbit-versa-lite
fitbit-versa-lite
fitbit-versa-lite
fitbit-versa-lite
fitbit-versa-lite

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 category ranking...

Technical Specifications of smartwatch Fitbit Versa Lite

Technical score
Technical score
5.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the smartwatchx27s technical performance, covering seven key areas: health, fitness, display & design, hardware, battery, smart features and connectivity.
When it matters
When you want to compare smartwatches based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 86% of models
Score components:

24%

6.4

Health

21%

6.4

Fitness

16%

3.0

Battery

14%

4.8

Smart features

12%

2.4

Connectivity

9%

6.6

Display & Design

4%

3.6

Hardware

5.0
Review score
Review score
7.7/ 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.
Weighting: Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Share: Reviews are 30% of the overall score for every model in this category; each of the 5 needed reviews that is missing counts as 7/10.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
Grades by review (20)
Text reviews 4
✓ explicit
4

8.8%

8.0

techradar.com

8.8%

8.0

expertreviews.co.uk

8.8%

7.0

tomsguide.com

8.8%

7.0

techadvisor.com

Video reviews 4

3.5%

9.0

Hayls World

3.5%

4.0

Engadget

1.8%

8.0

Team VRY

1.8%

7.0

DC Rainmaker

estimated from the review
8 reviews: 6 with a printed score, 2 estimated from the review. 12 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Share in the overall score: 30%, the same for every model in this category.
Shop star ratings are not part of this score.
7.7
Value for money
Value for money
7.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the smartwatch's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a smartwatch with a good balance between quality and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 82% of models
Score components:

60%

5.8

Overall score

40%

9.9

Price

7.0
Brand name
Fitbit
Heart rate monitor
yes
Heart rate monitor
yes
â–² Better than 11% of models
This smartwatch includes a heart rate monitor. 10.5% of smartwatches include a heart rate monitor.
Blood oxygen monitoring
yes
Blood oxygen monitoring
yes
â–² Better than 33% of models
This smartwatch supports blood oxygen monitoring. 33.4% of smartwatches support blood oxygen monitoring.
ECG
no
ECG
no
â–¼ Worse than 17% of models
This smartwatch does not support ECG. 16.6% of smartwatches support ECG.
Irregular heart rate warnings
yes
Irregular heart rate warnings
yes
â–² Better than 52% of models
This smartwatch supports irregular heart rate warnings. 51.9% of smartwatches support irregular heart rate warnings.
Show more
What reviewers say
Accelerometer
yes
Accelerometer
yes
â–² Better than 1% of models
This smartwatch includes an accelerometer. 0.6% of smartwatches include an accelerometer.
Barometer
no
Barometer
no
â–¼ Worse than 50% of models
This smartwatch does not include a barometer. 49.6% of smartwatches include a barometer.
Gyroscope
no
Gyroscope
no
â–¼ Worse than 70% of models
This smartwatch does not include a gyroscope. 70% of smartwatches include a gyroscope.
Cadence sensor
no
Cadence sensor
no
â–¼ Worse than 31% of models
This smartwatch does not include a cadence sensor. 31.2% of smartwatches include a cadence sensor.
Distance tracking
yes
Distance tracking
yes
â–² Better than 4% of models
This smartwatch supports distance tracking. 4.1% of smartwatches support distance tracking.
Distance tracking may depend on phone GPS/app on some models.
Show more
What reviewers say
Battery life
4 days
Battery life
4 days
â–¼ Worse than 70% of models
Market range: <1 days – >16 days
This smartwatch offers a battery life of 4 days which is shorter than that of 70.5% of smartwatches and equal to that of 2.9% of smartwatches.
Battery life in training mode
12 h
Battery life in training mode
12 h
â–¼ Worse than 62% of models
Market range: <5.5 h – >48 h
This smartwatch lasts 12 h in training mode which is shorter than 62.2% of smartwatches and equal to that of 3.2% of smartwatches.
Battery life with GPS on
N/A
Battery power
150 mAh
Battery power
150 mAh
â–¼ Worse than 96% of models
Market range: <195 mAh – >475 mAh
This smartwatch has a battery capacity of 150 mAh which is smaller than the batteries in 95.7% of smartwatches and equal to those in 0.6% of smartwatches.
Charge time
120 min
Charge time
120 min
â–¼ Worse than 43% of models
Market range: <60 min – >150 min
This smartwatch charges in 120 min which is faster than 13.1% of smartwatches and equal to the charge time of 44.2% of smartwatches.
Show more
What reviewers say
Operating system
Fitbit OS
Operating system
Fitbit OS
â–² Better than 58% of models
This smartwatch runs Fitbit OS which is more advanced than the operating system in 57.6% of smartwatches and the same as that in 1% of smartwatches.
Software update frequency
ended
Software update frequency
ended
â–¼ Worse than 43% of models
This smartwatch has ended software update support which is less active than that of 42.6% of smartwatches and equal to that of 57.5% of smartwatches.
Third-party app support
yes
Third-party app support
yes
â–² Better than 52% of models
This smartwatch supports third-party apps. 52.4% of smartwatches support third-party apps.
Notifications
yes
Notifications
yes
Category Benchmark
This smartwatch supports notifications. 0.3% of smartwatches support notifications.
Voice assistant support
no
Voice assistant support
no
â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
This smartwatch does not support voice assistants. 67.8% of smartwatches support voice assistants.
Show more
What reviewers say
Cellular module
no
Cellular module
no
â–¼ Worse than 18% of models
This smartwatch does not include a cellular module. 18% of smartwatches include a cellular module.
SIM cards
0
GPS
no
GPS
no
â–¼ Worse than 56% of models
This smartwatch does not support GPS. 56.2% of smartwatches support GPS.
Galileo support
no
Galileo support
no
â–¼ Worse than 39% of models
This smartwatch does not support Galileo navigation. 38.5% of smartwatches support Galileo navigation.
Compass
no
Compass
no
â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
This smartwatch does not include a compass. 52.7% of smartwatches include a compass.
Show more
What reviewers say
Screen size
1.34 inch
Screen size
1.34 inch
â–¼ Worse than 62% of models
Market range: <1.2 inch – >1.82 inch
This smartwatch has a screen size of 1.34 inch which is smaller than the screens of 62.2% of smartwatches and equal to those of 1.3% of smartwatches.
Some sources mention multiple/uncertain size variants.
Display type
LCD
Display type
LCD
â–¼ Worse than 90% of models
This smartwatch uses a LCD display type which is less advanced than that of 90.1% of smartwatches and the same as that of 7.4% of smartwatches.
Resolution
300x 300
Resolution
300x 300
â–¼ Worse than 61% of models
This smartwatch has a display resolution of 300x300 which is lower than that of 61.5% of smartwatches and equal to that of 0.4% of smartwatches.
Pixel density
317 ppi
Pixel density
317 ppi
â–¼ Worse than 59% of models
Market range: <207 ppi – >461 ppi
This smartwatch has a pixel density of 317 ppi which is lower than that of 58.6% of smartwatches and equal to that of 0.3% of smartwatches.
Display brightness
1,000 nits
Display brightness
1,000 nits
â–² Better than 59% of models
Market range: <450 nits – >2k nits
This smartwatch reaches 1,000 nits of display brightness, which is higher than that of 59.4% of smartwatches and equal to that of 26.5% of smartwatches.
Show more
What reviewers say
CPU speed
0.096 GHz
CPU speed
0.096 GHz
â–¼ Worse than 90% of models
This smartwatch uses a CPU configuration of 0.096 GHz which is slower than that in 90% of smartwatches and equal to that in 2% of smartwatches.
Processor model
?
RAM
?
Internal storage
0 GB
Internal storage
0 GB
â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
Market range: <0 GB – >32 GB
This smartwatch uses 0 GB for internal storage which is smaller than that of 73.6% of smartwatches and equal to that of 26.4% of smartwatches.
No local user storage for apps/media
External memory slot
no
External memory slot
no
Category Benchmark
This smartwatch does not include an external memory slot. 0.3% of smartwatches include an external memory slot.
Show more

Fitbit Versa Lite vs the average smartwatch

246810TotalHealthFitnessBatteryConnectivityDisplay & DesignSmart featuresHardware
  • VO2 max measurement
    VO2 max measurement
    yes
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    This smartwatch measures VO2 max, the average smartwatch does not. 47.6% of smartwatches measure VO2 max.
  • Third-party app support
    Third-party app support
    yes
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    This smartwatch supports third-party apps, the average smartwatch does not. 47.6% of smartwatches support third-party apps.
  • Irregular heart rate alerts
    Irregular heart rate warnings
    yes
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    This smartwatch supports irregular heart rate warnings, the average smartwatch does not. 48.1% of smartwatches support irregular heart rate warnings.
  • Calorie tracking
    Calorie tracking
    yes
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    This smartwatch supports calorie tracking, the average smartwatch does not. 48.6% of smartwatches support calorie tracking.
  • More advanced operating system
    Operating system
    Fitbit OS
    â–² Better than 58% of models
    This smartwatch runs a more advanced operating system than the average smartwatch (Fitbit OS vs Proprietary OS).
    Fitbit OS vs Proprietary OS
  • Stronger display glass
    Display glass type
    Corning Gorilla Glass 3
    â–² Better than 58% of models
    This smartwatch uses Corning Gorilla Glass 3 display glass, while the average smartwatch uses mineral glass.
    Corning Gorilla Glass 3 vs mineral glass
  • 22.1 g lighter weight
    Weight
    22.9 g
    ★ Better than 98% of models
    Market range: <29 g – >80 g
    This smartwatch is lighter than the average smartwatch (22.9 g vs 45 g). The average smartwatch weighs 45.0 g.
    Weight refers to watch case without strap/band.
    22.9 g vs 45.0 g
  • 400 nits higher display brightness
    Display brightness
    1,000 nits
    â–² Better than 59% of models
    Market range: <450 nits – >2k nits
    This smartwatch has higher display brightness than the average smartwatch (1000 nits vs 600 nits). The average smartwatch reaches 600 nits.
    1,000 nits vs 600 nits
  • 63.4% more popular
    Fitbit Versa Lite has a higher popularity than the average smartwatch (10 vs 6.1).
    10 vs 6.12
  • VO2 max measurement
    VO2 max measurement
    yes
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    This smartwatch measures VO2 max, the average smartwatch does not. 47.6% of smartwatches measure VO2 max.
  • Irregular heart rate alerts
    Irregular heart rate warnings
    yes
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    This smartwatch supports irregular heart rate warnings, the average smartwatch does not. 48.1% of smartwatches support irregular heart rate warnings.
  • Calorie tracking
    Calorie tracking
    yes
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    This smartwatch supports calorie tracking, the average smartwatch does not. 48.6% of smartwatches support calorie tracking.
  • Weight tracking
    Weight tracking
    yes
    â–² Better than 61% of models
    This smartwatch supports weight tracking, the average smartwatch does not. 39.1% of smartwatches support weight tracking.
  • Water intake tracking
    Water intake tracking
    yes
    â–² Better than 56% of models
    This smartwatch tracks water intake, the average smartwatch does not. 44% of smartwatches track water intake.
  • Stronger display glass
    Display glass type
    Corning Gorilla Glass 3
    â–² Better than 58% of models
    This smartwatch uses Corning Gorilla Glass 3 display glass, while the average smartwatch uses mineral glass.
    Corning Gorilla Glass 3 vs mineral glass
  • 22.1 g lighter weight
    Weight
    22.9 g
    ★ Better than 98% of models
    Market range: <29 g – >80 g
    This smartwatch is lighter than the average smartwatch (22.9 g vs 45 g). The average smartwatch weighs 45.0 g.
    Weight refers to watch case without strap/band.
    22.9 g vs 45.0 g
  • 400 nits higher display brightness
    Display brightness
    1,000 nits
    â–² Better than 59% of models
    Market range: <450 nits – >2k nits
    This smartwatch has higher display brightness than the average smartwatch (1000 nits vs 600 nits). The average smartwatch reaches 600 nits.
    1,000 nits vs 600 nits
  • 2 mm narrower band
    Width of band
    20.0 mm
    â–² Better than 66% of models
    Market range: <20 mm – >22 mm
    This smartwatch has a narrower band width than the average smartwatch (20 mm vs 22 mm). The average smartwatch band is 22.0 mm wide.
    20.0 mm vs 22.0 mm
  • 8 mm narrower watch width
    Width
    34.0 mm
    ★ Better than 91% of models
    Market range: <34.6 mm – >46.8 mm
    This smartwatch is narrower than the average smartwatch (34 mm vs 42 mm). The average smartwatch width is 42.0 mm.
    34.0 mm vs 42.0 mm
  • 4.4 mm shorter watch height
    Height
    40.6 mm
    â–² Better than 85% of models
    Market range: <39.5 mm – >51 mm
    This smartwatch is shorter than the average smartwatch (40.6 mm vs 45 mm). The average smartwatch height is 45 mm.
    40.6 mm vs 45 mm
  • Third-party app support
    Third-party app support
    yes
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    This smartwatch supports third-party apps, the average smartwatch does not. 47.6% of smartwatches support third-party apps.
  • More advanced operating system
    Operating system
    Fitbit OS
    â–² Better than 58% of models
    This smartwatch runs a more advanced operating system than the average smartwatch (Fitbit OS vs Proprietary OS).
    Fitbit OS vs Proprietary OS
  • No GPS support
    Route support
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 50% of models
    This smartwatch does not support GPS, the average smartwatch does. 56.1% of smartwatches support GPS.
  • Basic display type
    Display type
    LCD
    â–¼ Worse than 90% of models
    This smartwatch uses LCD display technology, while the average smartwatch features AMOLED.
    LCD vs AMOLED
  • No multi-sport mode
    Multi-sport mode
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 69% of models
    This smartwatch does not include a multi-sport mode, the average smartwatch does. 68.4% of smartwatches include a multi-sport mode.
  • No stress monitoring
    Stress monitoring
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 66% of models
    This smartwatch does not support stress monitoring, the average smartwatch does. 65.4% of smartwatches support stress monitoring.
  • No elevation tracking
    Elevation tracking
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 64% of models
    This smartwatch does not support elevation tracking, the average smartwatch does. 64.3% of smartwatches support elevation tracking.
  • No coaching features
    Coaching
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 55% of models
    This smartwatch does not support coaching, the average smartwatch does. 54.6% of smartwatches support coaching.
  • No music playback
    Music playback
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 54% of models
    This smartwatch does not support music playback, the average smartwatch does. 54.2% of smartwatches support music playback.
  • No gyroscope
    Gyroscope
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 70% of models
    This smartwatch does not include a gyroscope, the average smartwatch does. 69.9% of smartwatches include a gyroscope.
  • 6.7% worse value for money
    Fitbit Versa Lite has a lower value-for-money score than the average smartwatch (7.05 vs 7.5).
    7.05 vs 7.52
  • No stress monitoring
    Stress monitoring
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 66% of models
    This smartwatch does not support stress monitoring, the average smartwatch does. 65.4% of smartwatches support stress monitoring.
  • No multi-sport mode
    Multi-sport mode
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 69% of models
    This smartwatch does not include a multi-sport mode, the average smartwatch does. 68.4% of smartwatches include a multi-sport mode.
  • No elevation tracking
    Elevation tracking
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 64% of models
    This smartwatch does not support elevation tracking, the average smartwatch does. 64.3% of smartwatches support elevation tracking.
  • No coaching features
    Coaching
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 55% of models
    This smartwatch does not support coaching, the average smartwatch does. 54.6% of smartwatches support coaching.
  • No gyroscope
    Gyroscope
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 70% of models
    This smartwatch does not include a gyroscope, the average smartwatch does. 69.9% of smartwatches include a gyroscope.
  • No live tracking
    Live tracking
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 89% of models
    This smartwatch does not support live tracking, the average smartwatch does. 88.6% of smartwatches support live tracking.
  • 65 fewer exercise profiles
    Multi-sport mode
    15
    â–¼ Worse than 69% of models
    This smartwatch supports fewer exercise modes than the average smartwatch (15 vs 80). The average smartwatch supports 80 exercise modes.
    Reported as at least 15 exercise modes.
    15 vs 80
  • No voice feedback
    Voice feedback
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 62% of models
    This smartwatch does not support voice feedback, the average smartwatch does. 61.9% of smartwatches support voice feedback.
  • No low-power mode
    Low power mode
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 93% of models
    This smartwatch does not include a low power mode, the average smartwatch does. 92.5% of smartwatches include a low power mode.
  • 3 days day/s shorter battery life
    Battery life
    4 days
    â–¼ Worse than 70% of models
    Market range: <1 days – >16 days
    This smartwatch offers 4 days of battery life, while the average smartwatch offers 7 days.
    4 days vs 7 days
  • 150 mAh smaller battery capacity
    Battery life
    150 mAh days
    â–¼ Worse than 70% of models
    Market range: <1 days – >16 days
    This smartwatch has a smaller battery capacity than the average smartwatch (150 mAh vs 300 mAh). The average smartwatch battery is 300 mAh.
    150 mAh vs 300 mAh
  • 7.25 h shorter training battery life
    Battery life in training mode
    12 h
    â–¼ Worse than 62% of models
    Market range: <5.5 h – >48 h
    This smartwatch lasts less in training mode than the average smartwatch (12 h vs 19.25 h). The average smartwatch lasts 19.25 h.
    12 h vs 19.25 h
  • No GPS support
    Route support
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 50% of models
    This smartwatch does not support GPS, the average smartwatch does. 56.1% of smartwatches support GPS.
  • No compass
    Compass
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
    This smartwatch does not include a compass, the average smartwatch does. 52.6% of smartwatches include a compass.
  • Older Bluetooth version
    Bluetooth version
    4.0
    â–¼ Worse than 86% of models
    This smartwatch supports an older Bluetooth version than the average smartwatch (4 vs 5). The average smartwatch uses 5.0.
    4.0 vs 5.0
  • Basic display type
    Display type
    LCD
    â–¼ Worse than 90% of models
    This smartwatch uses LCD display technology, while the average smartwatch features AMOLED.
    LCD vs AMOLED
  • No always-on display
    Always-On Display
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
    This smartwatch does not have an always-on display, the average smartwatch does. 67.6% of smartwatches have an always-on display.
  • 0.06 inch smaller screen size
    Screen size
    1.34 inch
    â–¼ Worse than 62% of models
    Market range: <1.2 inch – >1.82 inch
    This smartwatch has a smaller screen size than the average smartwatch (1.3 inch vs 1.4 inch). The average smartwatch screen is 1.40 inch.
    Some sources mention multiple/uncertain size variants.
    1.34 inch vs 1.40 inch
  • Less practical form
    Form
    square
    â–¼ Worse than 61% of models
    This smartwatch uses a square form, while the average smartwatch uses round.
    square vs round
  • Lower resolution
    Display type
    300 x 300
    â–¼ Worse than 90% of models
    This smartwatch has a display resolution of 300x300, while the average smartwatch reaches 352x430.
    300x300 vs 352x430
  • No music playback
    Music playback
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 54% of models
    This smartwatch does not support music playback, the average smartwatch does. 54.2% of smartwatches support music playback.
  • No voice assistant
    Voice assistant support
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
    This smartwatch does not support voice assistants, the average smartwatch does. 67.7% of smartwatches support voice assistants.
  • No call answering
    Call answering
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 58% of models
    This smartwatch does not support call answering, the average smartwatch does. 58.1% of smartwatches support call answering.
  • No voice command support
    Voice commands
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
    This smartwatch does not support voice commands, the average smartwatch does. 67% of smartwatches support voice commands.
  • No passcode
    Passcode
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
    This smartwatch does not include passcode protection, the average smartwatch does. 67.8% of smartwatches include passcode protection.
  • No speaker
    Built-in speaker
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 56% of models
    This smartwatch does not include a built-in speaker, the average smartwatch does. 56.1% of smartwatches include a built-in speaker.
  • 1 fewer microphones
    Number of microphones
    0
    â–¼ Worse than 75% of models
    Market range: <0 – >1
    This smartwatch has fewer microphones than the average smartwatch (0 vs 1). The average smartwatch includes 1 microphones.
    0 vs 1
  • Slower CPU speed
    CPU speed
    0.096 GHz
    â–¼ Worse than 90% of models
    This smartwatch uses a CPU configuration of 0.096 GHz, while the average smartwatch uses 1 GHz.
    0.096 GHz vs 1 GHz
  • 2 year/s older release date
    Release date
    2019
    â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
    Market range: <2k – >2k
    This smartwatch is an older model than the average smartwatch (2019 vs 2021). The average smartwatch was released in 2021.
    March 2019
    2019 vs 2021
  • 4 GB less storage
    Internal storage
    0 GB
    â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
    Market range: <0 GB – >32 GB
    This smartwatch offers less internal storage than the average smartwatch (0 GB vs 4 GB). The average smartwatch provides 4 GB of storage.
    No local user storage for apps/media
    0 GB vs 4 GB

Video reviews

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

9.0
Hayls World
≈ estimated
23/08/2019
Unboxing and hands-on review · display, app and battery
Verdict
Fitbit Versa Lite is a compact, attractive smartwatch with a sharp display and plenty of customisation options.
4.0
Engadget
≈ estimated
14/04/2019
Hands-on review · sleep, heart rate and feature tests
Verdict
Fitbit Versa Lite is too basic for its price, and a much better smartwatch costs only slightly more.
8.0
Team VRY
≈ estimated
02/07/2020
First look · unboxing and setup
Verdict
Fitbit Versa Lite is so far worth the money, with easy setup and a pleasant design.
7.0
DC Rainmaker
≈ estimated
06/03/2019
First look · unboxing, features and first run test
Verdict
Fitbit Versa Lite shows no obvious issues on the first run, though more runs are needed before judging accuracy.
Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet

What reviewers agree on

Based on 10 · 12

Reviewers like the health and activity tracking, battery and screen, but miss extra sensors, music and GPS, and find the controls sluggish.
Praised
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

7.0
techadvisor.com
✓ explicit
12/07/2019
Review · Health and running tracker
Verdict
The Fitbit Versa Lite is a sleek fitness tracker that lasts four days or more and tracks workouts well, but it has no built-in GPS or music.
8.0
expertreviews.co.uk
✓ explicit
01/12/2020
Review · Running watch
Verdict
The Fitbit Versa Lite is a stylish, simple watch for running and daily use, but its heart-rate readings jump around and it lacks built-in GPS.
8.0
techradar.com
✓ explicit
11/03/2021
Review · Lightweight fitness watch
Verdict
The Fitbit Versa Lite is a light, comfortable stripped-down Versa for smaller wrists, but it has no GPS, music or Fitbit Pay.
7.0
tomsguide.com
✓ explicit
08/05/2020
Hands-on review · Fitness tracker
Verdict
The Fitbit Versa Lite is a good-looking tracker for workouts and sleep, but without onboard GPS or music storage you still need your phone.
dcrainmaker.com
06/03/2019
Not graded yet
businessinsider.com
12/03/2019
Not graded yet
expertreviews.co.uk
12/03/2019
Same outlet as a graded review (counted once)
wired.com
14/03/2019
Not graded yet
macworld.com
02/04/2019
Not graded yet
androidcentral.com
12/03/2019
Not graded yet
wareable.com
12/03/2019
Not graded yet
tweaktown.com
24/04/2019
Not graded yet
uk.pcmag.com
12/03/2019
Not graded yet
9.0
infoboard.de
≈ estimated
27/08/2019
Hands-on test · Fitness watch
Verdict
The Fitbit Versa Lite Edition suits people who mainly want accurate tracking and four days of battery, and can do without payment or music features.
computerbild.de
22/03/2019
Not graded yet
connect.de
12/04/2019
Not graded yet
computerbase.de
25/04/2019
Not graded yet
macwelt.de
12/04/2019
Not graded yet
7.6
charlestech.fr
✓ explicit
02/08/2024
Review · Compact fitness tracker
Verdict
The Fitbit Versa Lite suits small wrists and stays readable in sunlight, but its battery lasts only about two days.
vonguru.fr
05/04/2019
Not graded yet
8.0
irrompibles.net
≈ estimated
26/08/2019
Unboxing review · Everyday smartwatch
Verdict
The Fitbit Versa Lite suits everyday users who want four days of battery and quick iPhone sync, though it's not built for high-performance athletes.
fayerwayer.com
12/04/2019
Not graded yet
revista-gadget.es
05/06/2019
Not graded yet
pisapapeles.net
15/05/2019
Not graded yet
7.0
gamermatic.net
✓ explicit
10/12/2019
Hands-on test · Fitness smartwatch
Verdict
The Fitbit Versa Lite is a slim, responsive watch with four days of battery and an excellent app, but it drops the Versa's music storage and contactless payment.
androidworld.nl
16/04/2019
Not graded yet
global.techradar.com
21/06/2019
Not graded yet
smarthealth.nl
21/03/2019
Not graded yet
iculture.nl
12/03/2019
Not graded yet
iphoned.nl
12/03/2019
Not graded yet

Third-party reviews

Read buyer reviews on Amazon →

What we like about Fitbit Versa Lite

  • Affordable price point compared to the standard Versa
  • Sleek and extremely lightweight design for comfortable all-day wear
  • Excellent battery life, typically lasting 4 to 5 days on a single charge
  • Bright, vibrant, and easy-to-read touchscreen display
  • Effective core tracking for steps, heart rate, and sleep stages
  • User-friendly and intuitive interface, making it ideal for beginners

What we don't like about Fitbit Versa Lite

  • Lacks built-in GPS, requiring a tethered smartphone connection for route tracking
  • No on-device music storage or playback capability
  • Does not track floors climbed (no altimeter) or swim laps (no gyroscope)
  • Does not support Fitbit Pay for contactless payments
  • Some users reported occasional syncing and connectivity issues
  • Notifications can be limited, especially for iOS users who cannot send quick replies

Verdict

The Fitbit Versa Lite is a streamlined health and fitness smartwatch featuring a 1.34-inch color LCD touchscreen with 300 x 300 resolution and 1,000 nits of brightness. Housed in a lightweight anodized aluminium body, it includes an optical heart rate monitor, a 3-axis accelerometer, and an SpO2 sensor for tracking activity, sleep stages, and female health. Main pros include its comfortable, slim design, water resistance up to 50 metres, and a battery life of 4+ days. However, it lacks built-in GPS (relying on a connected smartphone), does not support on-device music storage, and omits the altimeter and gyroscope found in the standard Versa, meaning it cannot track floors climbed or swimming laps.

Compare Fitbit Versa Lite with other Smartwatches

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Fitbit Versa Lite and other Smartwatches

No results found