OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Smartwatches Methodology v3.0
Smartwatches Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Smartwatches 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 Smartwatches Methodology v3.0

Fossil Nate review: 127 specs compared

Avg. price:~£190Screen size:?Battery life:?Display type:E-Ink

Fossil Nate Review: Compare 127 technical specifications and 11 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Smartwatches category and whether it is worth buying.

Fossil Nate
5.4/10

Overall score

Score
5.4/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, best-of lists, expert reviews and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 35%, List score 30%, Reviews score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 96% of models
Score components

35%

4.5

Technical score

30%

?

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

25%

4.5

Reviews score

10%

4.5

Sentiment score

â–¼Worse than 96% of smartwatches
6.6

Value for money

Value for money
6.6/ 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 97% of models
Score components

70%

5.4

Overall score

30%

9.5

Price

â–¼Worse than 97%
4.5

Technical score

Technical score
4.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 35% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 93% of models
Score components

24%

2.3

Health

21%

5.7

Fitness

16%

7.1

Battery

14%

4.8

Smart features

12%

2.9

Connectivity

9%

5.1

Display & Design

4%

4.2

Hardware

â–¼Worse than 93%
4.5

Reviews score

Reviews score
4.5/ 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. Every review counts the same: written or video, short or full test.
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: 7.4 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 95% of models

4.5

Mark 7.8 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

7.9

Average grade

20%

7.4

Popularity

Grades by review (11)
7 reviews + 4 videos, average 7.9/10. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–¼Worse than 95%
?

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
  • fossil-nate
  • fossil-nate
fossil-nate
fossil-nate
Where to buy
*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.

What reviewers say about the Fossil Nate

Based on 10 · 4

Reviewers like the rugged design, chronograph and strap, but most find it too big and heavy.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of smartwatch Fossil Nate

Technical score
Technical score
4.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 35% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 93% of models
Score components:

24%

2.3

Health

21%

5.7

Fitness

16%

7.1

Battery

14%

4.8

Smart features

12%

2.9

Connectivity

9%

5.1

Display & Design

4%

4.2

Hardware

4.5
Reviews score
4.5
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.6/ 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 97% of models
Score components:

70%

5.4

Overall score

30%

9.5

Price

6.6
Heart rate monitor
no
This smartwatch does not include a heart rate monitor. 90.7% of smartwatches include a heart rate monitor.
Blood oxygen monitoring
no
This smartwatch does not support blood oxygen monitoring. 69.7% of smartwatches support blood oxygen monitoring.
ECG
no
This smartwatch does not support ECG. 18.2% of smartwatches support ECG.
Irregular heart rate warnings
no
This smartwatch does not support irregular heart rate warnings. 50.6% of smartwatches support irregular heart rate warnings.
HRV tracking
no
This smartwatch does not support HRV tracking. 45.2% of smartwatches support HRV tracking.
Show more
Accelerometer
yes
This smartwatch includes an accelerometer. 0.5% of smartwatches include an accelerometer.
Barometer
no
This smartwatch does not include a barometer. 53.6% of smartwatches include a barometer.
Gyroscope
no
This smartwatch does not include a gyroscope. 71.3% of smartwatches include a gyroscope.
Cadence sensor
no
This smartwatch does not include a cadence sensor. 32.9% of smartwatches include a cadence sensor.
Distance tracking
yes
This smartwatch supports distance tracking. 3.7% of smartwatches support distance tracking.
Distance tracking may depend on phone GPS/app on some models.
Show more
What reviewers say
Battery life
?
Battery life in training mode
?
Battery life with GPS on
N/A
Battery power
?
Charge time
?
Show more
Operating system
Wear OS
This smartwatch runs Wear OS, which is more advanced than the system in 80.1% of Smartwatches and equal to 15.8% of Smartwatches.
Software update frequency
ended
This smartwatch has ended software update support which is less active than that of 46.1% of smartwatches and equal to that of 53.9% of smartwatches.
Third-party app support
yes
This smartwatch supports third-party apps. 48.5% of smartwatches support third-party apps.
Notifications
yes
This smartwatch supports notifications. 0.3% of smartwatches support notifications.
Voice assistant support
no
This smartwatch does not support voice assistants. 69.3% of smartwatches support voice assistants.
Show more
What reviewers say
Cellular module
no
This smartwatch does not include a cellular module. 16.7% of smartwatches include a cellular module.
SIM cards
0
GPS
no
This smartwatch does not support GPS. 59.8% of smartwatches support GPS.
Galileo support
no
This smartwatch does not support Galileo navigation. 43.6% of smartwatches support Galileo navigation.
Dual-frequency GPS
no
This smartwatch does not support dual-frequency GPS. 15.1% of Smartwatches offer this.
Show more
Screen size
?
Display type
E-Ink
This smartwatch uses E-Ink, which is less advanced than the screen in 97.9% of Smartwatches and equal to 2.1% of Smartwatches.
Resolution
?
Pixel density
218 ppi
Market range: <213 ppi – >461 ppi
This smartwatch has a pixel density of 218 ppi, which is lower than 86.9% of Smartwatches and equal to 2.7% of Smartwatches.
Display brightness
?
Show more
What reviewers say
CPU speed
?
Processor model
?
RAM
N/A
Internal storage
?
External memory slot
no
This smartwatch does not include an external memory slot. 0.3% of smartwatches include an external memory slot.
Show more

Fossil Nate vs the average smartwatch

246810TotalHealthFitnessBatteryConnectivityDisplay & DesignSmart featuresHardware
  • More advanced operating system
    This smartwatch runs a more advanced operating system than the average smartwatch (Wear OS vs Proprietary OS).
    Wear OS vs Proprietary OS
  • Supports ANT+
    This smartwatch supports ANT+, the average smartwatch does not. 13% of smartwatches support ANT+.
  • Better band material
    This smartwatch uses leather, stainless steel for the band material, while the average smartwatch uses silicone.
    leather, stainless steel vs silicone
  • Water intake tracking
    This smartwatch tracks water intake, the average smartwatch does not. 44.1% of smartwatches track water intake.
  • 8 mm slimmer strap
    This smartwatch has a slimmer strap than the average smartwatch (14 mm vs 22 mm). The average smartwatch has a 22 mm strap.
    14 mm vs 22 mm
  • Hybrid watch design
    This smartwatch has a hybrid design, the average smartwatch does not. 8.6% of smartwatches have a hybrid design.
  • Better case material
    This smartwatch uses stainless steel for the case material, while the average smartwatch uses polycarbonate.
    stainless steel vs polycarbonate
  • Water intake tracking
    This smartwatch tracks water intake, the average smartwatch does not. 44.1% of smartwatches track water intake.
  • Supports ANT+
    This smartwatch supports ANT+, the average smartwatch does not. 13% of smartwatches support ANT+.
  • Better band material
    This smartwatch uses leather, stainless steel for the band material, while the average smartwatch uses silicone.
    leather, stainless steel vs silicone
  • 8 mm slimmer strap
    This smartwatch has a slimmer strap than the average smartwatch (14 mm vs 22 mm). The average smartwatch has a 22 mm strap.
    14 mm vs 22 mm
  • Hybrid watch design
    This smartwatch has a hybrid design, the average smartwatch does not. 8.6% of smartwatches have a hybrid design.
  • Better case material
    This smartwatch uses stainless steel for the case material, while the average smartwatch uses polycarbonate.
    stainless steel vs polycarbonate
  • More advanced operating system
    This smartwatch runs a more advanced operating system than the average smartwatch (Wear OS vs Proprietary OS).
    Wear OS vs Proprietary OS
  • 35.7% lower review score
    Reviews score
    4.5/ 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. Every review counts the same: written or video, short or full test.
    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: 7.4 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 95% of models

    4.5

    Mark 7.8 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.9

    Average grade

    20%

    7.4

    Popularity

    Grades by review (11)
    7 reviews + 4 videos, average 7.9/10. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    4.5 vs 7.0
  • No VO2 max measurement
    This smartwatch does not measure VO2 max, the average smartwatch does. 51.3% of smartwatches measure VO2 max.
  • No blood oxygen monitoring
    This smartwatch does not support blood oxygen monitoring, the average smartwatch does. 69.6% of smartwatches support blood oxygen monitoring.
  • No GPS support
    This smartwatch does not support GPS, the average smartwatch does. 59.7% of smartwatches support GPS.
  • More basic display
    This smartwatch uses a more basic screen than the average smartwatch (E-Ink vs AMOLED).
    E-Ink vs AMOLED
  • No irregular heart rate alerts
    This smartwatch does not support irregular heart rate warnings, the average smartwatch does. 50.6% of smartwatches support irregular heart rate warnings.
  • No stress monitoring
    This smartwatch does not support stress monitoring, the average smartwatch does. 68.7% of smartwatches support stress monitoring.
  • No heart rate monitor
    This smartwatch does not include a heart rate monitor, the average smartwatch does. 90.5% of smartwatches include a heart rate monitor.
  • 35.7% lower review score
    Reviews score
    4.5/ 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. Every review counts the same: written or video, short or full test.
    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: 7.4 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 95% of models

    4.5

    Mark 7.8 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.9

    Average grade

    20%

    7.4

    Popularity

    Grades by review (11)
    7 reviews + 4 videos, average 7.9/10. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    4.5 vs 7.0
  • 40.0% lower sentiment score
    4.5 vs 7.5
  • 16.8% worse value for money
    Fossil Nate has a lower value-for-money score than the average smartwatch (6.65 vs 7.8).
    6.65 vs 7.76
  • 72.7% more expensive
    Fossil Nate is more expensive than the average smartwatch (£190 vs £110).
    £190 vs £110
  • No VO2 max measurement
    This smartwatch does not measure VO2 max, the average smartwatch does. 51.3% of smartwatches measure VO2 max.
  • No blood oxygen monitoring
    This smartwatch does not support blood oxygen monitoring, the average smartwatch does. 69.6% of smartwatches support blood oxygen monitoring.
  • No irregular heart rate alerts
    This smartwatch does not support irregular heart rate warnings, the average smartwatch does. 50.6% of smartwatches support irregular heart rate warnings.
  • No stress monitoring
    This smartwatch does not support stress monitoring, the average smartwatch does. 68.7% of smartwatches support stress monitoring.
  • No heart rate monitor
    This smartwatch does not include a heart rate monitor, the average smartwatch does. 90.5% of smartwatches include a heart rate monitor.
  • No cycle tracking
    This smartwatch does not support menstrual cycle tracking, the average smartwatch does. 66.8% of smartwatches support menstrual cycle tracking.
  • No smart scale support
    This smartwatch does not support smart scale compatibility, the average smartwatch does. 57.1% of smartwatches support smart scale compatibility.
  • No inactivity alerts
    This smartwatch does not support inactivity alerts, the average smartwatch does. 92.6% of smartwatches support inactivity alerts.
  • 5 years older
    This smartwatch was released earlier than the average smartwatch (2016 vs 2021). The average smartwatch was released in 2021.
    September 2016
    2016 vs 2021
  • No barometer
    This smartwatch does not include a barometer, the average smartwatch does. 53.6% of smartwatches include a barometer.
  • No pace tracking
    This smartwatch does not support pace tracking, the average smartwatch does. 80.6% of smartwatches support pace tracking.
  • No route tracking
    This smartwatch does not support route tracking, the average smartwatch does. 77% of smartwatches support route tracking.
  • No coaching features
    This smartwatch does not support coaching, the average smartwatch does. 58.8% of smartwatches support coaching.
  • No gyroscope
    This smartwatch does not include a gyroscope, the average smartwatch does. 71.2% of smartwatches include a gyroscope.
  • No auto-pause
    This smartwatch does not support auto pause, the average smartwatch does. 62.6% of smartwatches support auto pause.
  • No swim mode
    This smartwatch does not include a swim sport mode, the average smartwatch does. 76.9% of smartwatches include a swim sport mode.
  • No route support
    This smartwatch does not support route support, the average smartwatch does. 54.4% of smartwatches support route support.
  • No live tracking
    This smartwatch does not support live tracking, the average smartwatch does. 89.5% of smartwatches support live tracking.
  • No voice feedback
    This smartwatch does not support voice feedback, the average smartwatch does. 63.5% of smartwatches support voice feedback.
  • Basic battery type
    This smartwatch uses a button-cell battery, while the average smartwatch uses Li-Po.
    button-cell vs Li-Po
  • No battery indicator
    This smartwatch does not include a battery level indicator, the average smartwatch does. 97.8% of smartwatches include a battery level indicator.
  • No GPS support
    This smartwatch does not support GPS, the average smartwatch does. 59.7% of smartwatches support GPS.
  • No compass
    This smartwatch does not include a compass, the average smartwatch does. 56.7% of smartwatches include a compass.
  • Less current Bluetooth version
    This smartwatch uses a less current Bluetooth version than the average smartwatch (4.2 vs 5).
    4.2 vs 5
  • More basic display
    This smartwatch uses a more basic screen than the average smartwatch (E-Ink vs AMOLED).
    E-Ink vs AMOLED
  • No always-on display
    This smartwatch does not have an always-on display, the average smartwatch does. 70.3% of smartwatches have an always-on display.
  • 85 g heavier
    This smartwatch is heavier than the average smartwatch (130 g vs 45 g). The average smartwatch weighs 45 g.
    130 g vs 45 g
  • No ambient light sensor
    This smartwatch does not include an ambient light sensor, the average smartwatch does. 63.5% of smartwatches include an ambient light sensor.
  • 108 ppi less sharp screen
    This smartwatch has a less sharp screen than the average smartwatch (218 ppi vs 326 ppi). The average smartwatch has a pixel density of 326 ppi.
    218 ppi vs 326 ppi
  • 1.3 mm thicker
    This smartwatch is thicker than the average smartwatch (13 mm vs 11.7 mm). The average smartwatch is 11.7 mm thick.
    Some sources mention variant-dependent thickness values.
    13 mm vs 11.7 mm
  • No touchscreen
    This smartwatch does not have a touch screen, the average smartwatch does. 91.5% of smartwatches have a touch screen.
  • 5 mm taller case
    This smartwatch has a taller case than the average smartwatch (50 mm vs 45 mm). The average smartwatch is 45 mm tall.
    50 mm vs 45 mm
  • 7.5 mm wider case
    This smartwatch has a wider case than the average smartwatch (50 mm vs 42.5 mm). The average smartwatch measures 42.5 mm across.
    50 mm vs 42.5 mm
  • No music playback
    This smartwatch does not support music playback, the average smartwatch does. 57.1% of smartwatches support music playback.
  • No voice assistant
    This smartwatch does not support voice assistants, the average smartwatch does. 69.2% of smartwatches support voice assistants.
  • No call answering
    This smartwatch does not support call answering, the average smartwatch does. 60% of smartwatches support call answering.
  • No voice command support
    This smartwatch does not support voice commands, the average smartwatch does. 68.1% of smartwatches support voice commands.
  • No passcode
    This smartwatch does not include passcode protection, the average smartwatch does. 70.4% of smartwatches include passcode protection.
  • No widget support
    This smartwatch does not support widgets, the average smartwatch does. 84.4% of smartwatches support widgets.
  • No gesture control
    This smartwatch does not support gesture control, the average smartwatch does. 79.6% of smartwatches support gesture control.
  • No speaker
    This smartwatch does not include a built-in speaker, the average smartwatch does. 56.7% of smartwatches include a built-in speaker.

Video reviews

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

9.0
Dave The Watch Man
≈ estimated
16/02/2024
Long-term review · four years of personal ownership
Verdict
Fossil Nate is still a good-looking, reliable watch the reviewer clearly recommends after four years of wear.
9.0
Helpful DIY
≈ estimated
31/03/2016
Hands-on review · chronograph and styling
Verdict
Fossil Nate is a versatile watch that suits almost any outfit and occasion.
8.0
Best Watches Under
≈ estimated
04/09/2013
Short review · size, comfort and bezel
Verdict
Fossil Nate is a strong pick for big-watch fans, though it is heavy and its date window is hard to read.
9.0
Helpful DIY
≈ estimated
09/07/2016
Short review · design, chronograph and water resistance
Verdict
Fossil Nate is a very versatile watch that the reviewer likes for almost any outfit.
Hands-on video, no verdict
Hands-on video, no verdict
Shop video
Shop video
Shop video
Shop video
Shop video
Not graded

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

7.0
indiatoday.in
✓ explicit
25/01/2017
Hands-on review · Hybrid smartwatch
Verdict
The Fossil Q Nate is a stylish watch with light smart features, best for buyers who want a traditional watch first rather than a full smartwatch.
9.0
lifeofmike.co.za
≈ estimated
14/12/2016
Travel test · Activity tracking
Verdict
The Fossil Q Nate is a traditional-looking watch that counts steps and follows the phone's time zone, suiting travelers who want no charging, though it is only splash proof.
7.8
mtwatches.com
✓ explicit
05/04/2026
Six-month test · Brown leather chronograph
Verdict
The Fossil Nate JR1354 is an easy-to-read brown leather chronograph for everyday wear, best for buyers who don't need a mechanical movement or sapphire crystal.
7.0
digit.in
≈ estimated
21/02/2017
Hands-on review · Hybrid analog watch
Verdict
The Fossil Q Nate is a rugged metal watch that shows alerts with its hands, best for buyers who put style ahead of app support.
8.0
pcquest.com
≈ estimated
16/02/2017
Feature review · Quartz hybrid watch
Verdict
The Fossil Q Nate suits anyone who wants a classic quartz watch that buzzes for chosen alerts and counts steps, though it has no screen.
8.0
commeuncamion.com
≈ estimated
17/07/2014
Test · Military-look chronograph
Verdict
The Fossil Nate JR1390 is a large military-look chronograph for holidays and outdoor days, but at over 100g it takes a while to get used to.
6.0
lheurepassion.com
≈ estimated
23/02/2026
Candid test · Oversized chronograph
Verdict
The Fossil Nate is a bold, oversized weekend chronograph that won't fit under shirt cuffs and isn't meant for swimming.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Fossil Nate

  • Stylish, classic analog design that looks like a traditional watch
  • Exceptional battery life, lasting up to 6 months with a replaceable button cell or up to 2 weeks for HR models
  • High-quality build with a durable stainless steel case
  • Always-on display (analog hands or e-ink) is highly readable in direct sunlight
  • Hassle-free connectivity for basic notifications and activity tracking
  • Standard 22mm or 24mm interchangeable straps allow for easy customisation

What customers don't like about Fossil Nate

  • Difficult to read in dark or low-light conditions due to poor or missing backlight
  • Large 50mm case size can be too bulky and heavy for smaller wrists
  • Limited smartwatch functionality compared to full-screen devices (no apps or touch screen)
  • Software and app experience can be glitchy with limited notification support
  • Fitness tracking metrics (HR and sleep) are often reported as inconsistent or inaccurate
  • E-ink screen on HR models has a slow refresh rate and occasionally unresponsive navigation

Verdict

The Fossil Q Nate is a military-inspired hybrid smartwatch featuring a rugged 50mm stainless steel case and 24mm interchangeable straps. Combining classic analog aesthetics with smart connectivity, it offers activity, calorie, and sleep tracking, along with discreet smartphone notifications via vibration and moving watch hands. Key specifications include 5 ATM water resistance, Bluetooth 4.1 Low Energy, and a long-lasting CR2430 coin cell battery that provides up to 6–12 months of life without charging. Main pros include its always-on display, durable build, and automatic time zone updates; however, notable cons include its bulky and heavy design, lack of a backlight for dark environments, and the absence of a digital touchscreen or advanced app ecosystem.

Compare Fossil Nate with other Smartwatches

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

Graphic comparison of Fossil Nate and other Smartwatches

No results found