Best Wearable Heart Rate Monitor, Expert Guide to Choose

Equipment
1

I’ve been meaning to get a wearable heart rate monitor for a while now, mainly to track my daily workouts, improve my cardio sessions, and keep a closer eye on my overall fitness. I thought it would be a simple decision, but the more I read, the more confusing it gets.

Some reviews say chest-strap monitors are far more accurate and reliable, while others argue that modern wearable sensors are good enough for everyday training and much more comfortable to use.

I’ve been checking reviews on sites like Wirecutter, Popular Mechanics, and Consumer Reports, along with a bunch of fitness and running forums.

Two names that keep coming up again and again are:

Polar H10 Heart Rate Sensor
(seems to be one of the most accurate chest-strap monitors, widely recommended for serious training and reliable data)

https://www.amazon.com/Polar-Heart-Rate-Monitor-Women/dp/B07PM54P4N?th=1

Garmin HRM-600
(popular all-round heart rate monitor with advanced metrics and good integration with fitness watches and apps)

https://www.amazon.com/Accurate-Dynamics-Stand-Alone-Activity-Recording/dp/B0F7ZGDDCX?th=1

Both look solid in their own way, but I don’t want to end up with something that feels like overkill for normal workouts—or something that’s too basic and unreliable.

I’ll mostly be using it for gym workouts, brisk walking, and some light running, but I also want accurate heart-rate tracking for longer sessions and general health monitoring.

If anyone here has long-term experience with either of these (or any other wearable heart rate monitor you’d recommend), I’d really appreciate your honest opinion.
Which one do you think is more practical for everyday use?

Thanks in advance.

1 Like
4

It wouldn’t be the Wahoo forum without a recommendation for the Wahoo TRACKR HR Strap.

Accurate, rechargeable, works with all the apps. I have two of them.

3 Likes
5

I have a collection of Heart Rate Monitors which includes the Polar H10 (and the H9, which is exactly as good except it only has 1 Bluetooth channel). The H10 is an electrical chest-strap HRM, with a longstanding reputation for accuracy. It seems to burn through batteries relatively quickly, even when the pod is removed from the strap between uses.

While the H10 is my gold-standard HRM, recently I find myself using a standalone armstrap optical monitor, the Polar OH-1 for daily use. It’s discontinued, but there is a newer model. The optical monitor is probably not accurate enough for looking at heart rate variability during a ride, but for average heart rate over any multi-second interval it is probably fine, and that’s good enough for me. It has an internal rechargeable battery.

When training indoors, several times recently I have had chest-strap monitors lose the signal because of excess sweat. It only occurs when I am really hammering, but it is a burden that I need to be watchful and keep an extra dry towel within reach. Not a problem I have heard others complain about, but optical armband monitor doesn’t have that issue.

Chest-straps need to be replaced periodically, their electronics don’t. I find that with Polar monitors it is worth buying the manufacturer’s replacement strap, because their snap-in connector is more than slightly different than competitors’. Plus, quality…. Recently the Polar H10 straps have been out of stock, the only way to get a Polar strap is to order a complete new monitor, although I haven’t checked again in the past week or so.

1 Like
6

The fundamental difference is that chest strap monitors directly measure the electrical signals from the heart. Watch monitors measure indirectly through an optical sensor that measures the changes in volume of blood.

Theoretically, the former should be more accurate and the latter can be less accurate because of movement, or skin coloration. Movement can be a problem during outdoor bicycle rides.

I have found that even with cleaning, the various strap HRMs I have used, stop recording too frequently, or just do not even sync up with my bicycle computer. I have never had that problem with my Garmin watch even when riding outdoors.

I once had the opportunity to compare the readings on my Garmin watch with medical grade equipment, and they matched directly. I was stationary during the comparison.

I do not care about HRV during a ride.

1 Like
7

Ever since I swapped my Garmin to a Coros watch I’m now using their armband which is just as accurate as the Polar and with it being on your bicep or upper arm it isn’t as uncomfortable as some heartrate straps can be. SYSTM has never had any problems picking it up and tbh after using the armband I would never go back to using an HR Strap. I should also say, the armband is charged just like the watch and last a long time if I’m on the Trainer maybe I’d charge it just once a month.

1 Like
8

I started out with a wrist Hrm and after it died, I followed all the written proof that chest straps are more accurate and bought a Wahoo chest strap.

I have to say it, as a lady, I find chest straps a nightmare. I’m already dealing with bra straps and I could never get that thing comfortable. Add to that it didn’t always read correctly so having to get it off, dampen the sensors, get it back on, frustrating. I know many ladies get by just fine, how, I don’t know. The tickr lives in a drawer.

I switched to a cheap Chinese coospoo armband Hrm strap and find it as accurate as I need. It’s also far more comfortable and convenient for new than either watch or chest strap, because my bicep isn’t bending as much or having as many other bands sliding over it. I think you should check out arm HRMs too! As “inaccurate” as they may be​:thinking::sweat_smile:

2 Likes
9

THIS :up_arrow: .

I use a Tickr Fit on the trainer and broadcast a virtual run via a Garmin watch to the Wahoo app while on the treadmill. I’ve tried chest straps over the last 30 years and none of them read from the get-go, no matter how much spit I add.

Editing to add that I at least try to exhibit ladylike behavior. :wink:

2 Likes
10

I use a Tickr Fit cos I no longer wanted to fiddle around with a chest strap. it’s a lot more comfortable this way and accuracy is absolutely OK. looking at the current research you’d find that while the most accurate HR sensors are chest straps, as already mentioned in one of the post above. arm straps are less accurate and smart watches come last. that doesn’t mean they’re less useful, it mostly depends on workout intensity and whether it’s full body or not. once you start using your arm, accuracy goes down (interesting comparison between a treadmill or a crosstrainer for endurance training). I haven’t found anything about cycling, but I’d guess that unless you’re a top level athlete where every heartbeat matters, an arm strap is absolutely sufficient. there really isn’t enough research about (yet?) about armstraps vs cheststraps, most studies I found have a focus on wearables. and since the development of “Consumer Wearable Technologies in Health Measurement” (you just gotta love this term), it’s hard to follow up with valid research.

if you want to read the full answer OE (an AI that’s exclusively based on medical research) gave me, look here (I hope the link works)

6 Likes
11

I am observing issues with significant drops of the reported heartrate by my H10 later in the workouts since the beginning of this year. I am somewhat suspicious that it has to do with the recent updates 4.0.4 / 4.1.10 of the firmware. May I ask which FW-release your H10 is on?

12

Polar doesn’t push updates very aggressively at all. I’m still on 3.3.1 on my H10. I probably won’t upgrade if people are reporting possible problems…