Wearables have come a long way from crude pedometers to advanced wrist-worn computers capable of tracking workouts, managing notifications, monitoring health stats and even diagnosing conditions. Two companies have propelled smart wearables into the mainstream – Fitbit ruled fitness tracking, while Apple reimagined communications from the wrist up.
But when considering between the Fitbit and Apple Watch platforms today, which comes out on top? What are the core strengths and weaknesses of each? Does Fitbit‘s fitness focus prevail over Apple‘s smartwatch superiority? This comprehensive evaluation will compare these rivals across hardware, software, app ecosystems, health sensors and more to crown the right smart wearable for any buyer.
Background: The Fitbit vs Apple Rivalry Takes Shape
Before assessing which platform edges out the other, it helps to understand their origins and trajectories.
Fitbit began in 2007 solely as an activity tracking specialist, selling over 120 million devices in just over a decade. Its lineup expanded from basic trackers like the Flex to advanced smartwatches like Ionic. Fitbit‘s innovation made wearables a mass market category rather than a niche. In fact by 2019 Fitbit accounted for 32% of the global wearables market according to IDC data.
Meanwhile Apple entered wearables much later with the Apple Watch in 2015, which worked exclusively with iPhones. While sales started slow, the cellular-capable Series 3 Watch launched in 2017 truly made it a mass market hit. By 2019 Apple became the category leader – the Apple Watch owned 36.5% of global smartwatch market share per Counterpoint Research. Fitbit and Apple now dominate wearables.
Global Wearables Market Share 2019
┌───────────────────┬────────────────┐
│ Brand │ Market Share % │
├───────────────────┼────────────────┤
│ Apple Watch │ 36.5% │
├───────────────────┼────────────────┤
│ Fitbit │ 32.0% │
└───────────────────┴────────────────┘Source: Counterpoint Research 2019
But while Apple innovates aggressively on tech like faster processors and sensors, Fitbit continues to excel at accessibility, affordability and lifestyle functionality for everyday health seekers. Let‘s analyze where each platform shines…and falls short.
Fitness and Health Tracking
As pioneers of activity tracking, Fitbit maintains an edge for foundational metrics. All Fitbit bands and watches measure steps, distance, calories burned, active minutes based on heart rate data and workout routes via connected GPS.
Apple caught up by integrating an entire Fitness app in watchOS packed with tracking options – it monitors moves, workouts, trends and contributes activity to closing Activity Rings. Each watch has an accelerometer, GPS and heart rate monitor as well.
Where Fitbit pulls ahead is sleep tracking – while Apple Watch detects sleep duration, Fitbit provides detailed sleep stage breakdowns and benchmarking against other users. However Apple Watch does enable third party sleep apps for deeper analysis.
Fitbit also beats Apple on battery life – most Fitbits last 4-7 days allowing continuous wearing for reliable 24/7 tracking. Apple Watch maxes out at 18 hours of juice requiring nightly charging. For bio-tracking dependent users, Fitbit certainly carries the edge.
Tracking & Hardware Fitbit Apple Watch
────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
Steps Tracking ✅ ✅
Distance Covered ✅ ✅
Calories Burned ✅ ✅
Active Minutes ✅ ✅
Sleep Tracking ✅ Conditional
GPS Route Tracking Conditional ✅
Heart Rate Monitor ✅ ✅
Blood Oxygen ✅ ✅
ECG ✅ ✅
Battery Duration 4-7 days ~18 hours
Always-on Display Conditional ✅
Microphone ✅ ✅
Speaker ✅ ✅Both platforms enable users to track key health signals over time. All Apple Watches take electrocardiograms (ECG) to detect irregular heart rhythms indicative of underlying conditions. Fitbit‘s Sense smartwatch also provides ECG readings.
Most advanced models on both platforms measure blood oxygen saturation (SpO2) too. Apple and Fitbit also alert users about unusually high or low heart rates. On notifications, Apple wins with watchOS letting users know if readings fall outside expected thresholds.
So when it comes to fitness and health tracking, Apple closes the gap on Fitbit but still falls short on battery. But Apple Watch builds significant differentiation elsewhere…
Smartwatch Capabilities Beyond Health
While Fitbit nails activity tracking, the Apple Watch acts as a communications hub on your wrist for messages, notifications, music and more. That means while Fitbit tracks steps, the Apple Watch enables leaving your phone behind.
The Apple Watch doesn‘t just work with Apple‘s apps either. The App Store offers thousands of watchOS apps spanning entertainment, retail, productivity, travel and health/fitness. Users can browse visually rich apps from leading brands.
Conversely, the Fitbit App Gallery lacks engagement, with only a handful of apps tailored to devices. Industry analysts have already warned Fitbit it risks ceding smartwatch ground to Apple in the app ecosystem fight.
App & Software Support Fitbit Apple Watch
────────────────────────────────────────────────
App Store Limited 5000+ apps
Music/Podcasts Conditional Full Support
Mobile Payments Limited to Premium All Models via Apple Pay
Third-party Apps Very Limited Extensive
Voice Assistant Alexa SiriWith software powering so much functionality, Apple‘s maturity here explains its platform stickiness. Fitbit focuses narrowly on health tracking over third-party integrations.
Speaking of assistants, Apple Watches even support Siri for hands-free voice commands. Alexa is only available on select Fitbit models for simple requests. Add LTE connectivity on certain Apple Watches allowing calls/texts sans phone, and Apple pulls way ahead on smarts.
The Apple Watch is simply miles beyond Fitbit as the premium smart wearable thanks to unmatched hardware/software integration. But there‘s one Wildcard that could shift the playing field…
The Google Acquisition Factor
In late 2021, search leader Google announced its intent to acquire Fitbit for $7.35 billion. This merger is still under regulatory review as of early 2023.
But if approved, Google would infuse Fitbit with renewed software expertise while gaining a foothold in wearables against Apple. Speculation is that future Fitbits could leverage Google‘s Wear OS smartwatch platform instead of Fitbit OS. This might close the app gap relative to watchOS.
There is also anticipation about Fitbit Premium integrating with Google Play Pass or Fitbit Coach workouts arriving on YouTube. Google integration could reinvigorate Fitbit rather than it remaining a stagnant hardware maker.
Still analysts debate whether Fitbit would lose brand independence under Google or be elevated as a lifestyle tracker alternative to hardcore smartwatches. Its health platform also gives Google capacity to compete with Apple‘s growing Health Records and clinics ambitions. Ultimately Google could turbocharge Fitbit‘s services..
Which Platform Should You Choose?
With overlapping features across health tracking, communications, apps, payment and voice, choosing Apple Watch vs Fitbit comes down to user needs and budgets.
For those wanting a premium smartwatch with deep iPhone integration spanning 500,000 apps, Apple Watch wins. It works seamlessly across Apple devices with advanced health sensors too. The concern is less than 2 days of battery life before recharging daily.
With Fitbit, you get affordability and accessibility for casual users wanting basic fitness data. All health essentials like heart rate and sleep stages are covered with 6+ day battery for reliability. But app functionality is minimal. Advanced smartwatch users need not apply.
In the end both platforms aim to keep users active through world-class personal technology. The decision lies in whether fitness tracking, long battery or smartwatch computing matter most. There‘s a right product match for every prospective user between these rivals.
