Coros vs. Garmin vs. Polar fitness test: How the new Vertix 2S compares to the Forerunner 965 and Vantage V3

Sunday Runday(Image credit score: Android Central)In this weekly column, Android Central Wearables Editor Michael Hicks talks concerning the world of wearables, apps, and health tech associated to operating and well being, in his quest to get quicker and healthier.Over the previous week, I’ve pitted the brand new COROS VERTIX 2S in opposition to two different flagship health watches—the Garmin Forerunner 965 and Polar Vantage V3—to see how they evaluate when it comes to GPS, coronary heart fee, and elevation accuracy.COROS gave the VERTIX 2S two key upgrades: a brand new satellite tv for pc antenna for higher “positioning accuracy in dense city/mountain environments” and an upgraded optical coronary heart fee monitor with extra LEDs. Since these are the one main variations from the 2021 VERTIX 2, I made a decision to check how improved they are surely.I’ve used the Forerunner 965 as my major operating look ahead to the final yr and as a benchmark for different watch evaluations. As for the Polar Vantage V3, my first mannequin crashed throughout lengthy exercises, delaying my evaluate till Polar may ship a alternative. The substitute hasn’t had any points, however I used to be curious whether or not it may match the others for accuracy and overcome my unhealthy first impression. Without any additional preamble, let’s dive into the Coros vs. Garmin vs. Polar health check accuracy outcomes for the perfect health watches that COROS, Garmin, and Polar provide!Coros vs. Garmin vs. Polar: GPS and elevation accuracy(Image credit score: Michael Hicks / Android Central)For this check, I wore all three health watches for a 5K city run, a 2-mile monitor dash exercise, and an eight-mile hike on Mount Diablo trails with steep climbs and dense foliage. Here are the outcomes, beginning with the 5K run:COROS VERTIX 2S: 3.19 miles, 8:27/mi tempo, 318W energy, 167 cadenceGarmin Forerunner 965: 3.16 miles, 8:31/mi tempo, 406W energy, 166 cadencePolar Vantage V3: 3.12 miles, 8:37/mi tempo, 384W, 84 cadenceBefore analyzing this, let’s take a look at the GPS map. The slideshow beneath reveals just a few key close-ups of how COROS (orange), Garmin (brown), and Polar (pink) carried out:Image 1 of 4(Image credit score: Android Central)(Image credit score: Android Central)(Image credit score: Android Central)(Image credit score: Android Central)Something was positively occurring with the Polar Vantage V3’s outcomes right here, regardless of the dual-frequency monitoring. It had me crashing by way of buildings and homes just like the Hulk for half of the run, then corrected itself and had me totally on monitor for the remainder of the run. It did make the outcomes noticeably shorter than its rival watches.Get the most recent information from Android Central, your trusted companion on the planet of AndroidCOROS and Garmin had been nearer to 1 one other. Of the 2, COROS stayed extra correct to my place early on, whereas Garmin was barely off (although not as cartoonishly as Polar). As the run went on, each had been both in sync or parallel, with the Forerunner (left wrist) and VERTIX (proper wrist) matching their physique positions. As I closed in on the monitor, Garmin fell off barely, having me run by way of automobiles within the parking zone — maybe the bushes above had been guilty. On the monitor itself, all three watches had been extraordinarily constant, although Garmin did the perfect job matching my second-lane place. Moving on to my devoted monitor exercise within the first lane — I ran eight laps of 100m sprints adopted by 100m jogs — these had been the outcomes:COROS VERTIX 2S: 2.01 miles, 7:27/mi tempo, 353W energy, 174 cadenceGarmin Forerunner 965: 2.01 miles, 7:28/mi tempo, 445W energy, 170 cadencePolar Vantage V3: 2.02 miles, 7:24/mi tempo, 457W, 88 cadenceImage 1 of two(Image credit score: Android Central)(Image credit score: Android Central)I’ve observed in earlier evaluate checks {that a} watch’s Track Run exercise actively makes the GPS map worse than once you use a typical run exercise. I’m unsure what to make of how Garmin (brown line) has me operating on the grass for eight laps and COROS (blue line) has me chopping throughout the inside monitor, however each gave me the identical distance.Polar (pink line) technically did the perfect job of matching my one-lane placement, however it additionally had me weaving drunkenly between lanes on the closing stretch, so I can not reward it, both. I’m additionally not sure how Polar thinks I’m averaging 80–90 steps a minute whereas operating, no matter my tempo…Overall, nobody wins right here, however as a result of a Track exercise can detect once you return to a place to begin, the lap outcomes needs to be correct throughout manufacturers, regardless of how wonky the strains look. (Image credit score: Michael Hicks / Android Central)Lastly, since COROS is advertising the VERTIX 2S as an adventurer’s watch, I wished to check the way it dealt with a hike, since I’m incapable of testing its cliff-climbing accuracy with out dying. Here’s the abstract:COROS VERTIX 2S: 7.81 miles, 17:45/mi tempo, 2,438 ft elevation achieveGarmin Forerunner 965: 7.84 miles, 17:41/mi tempo, 2,329 ft elevation achievePolar Vantage V3: 7.82 miles, 17:44/mi tempo, 2,297 ft elevation achieveImage 1 of 4(Image credit score: Android Central)(Image credit score: Android Central)(Image credit score: Android Central)(Image credit score: Android Central)Distance-wise, all three watches had been fairly comparable, which is encouraging! It was arduous to guage accuracy by taking a look at a zoomed-out satellite tv for pc map. I did discover a few moments the place COROS (orange) appeared to take a straight line to back-and-forth parts of the path the place Garmin (blue) and Polar (brown) saved correct. Garmin appeared to throw me into the underbrush a few occasions, presumably thrown off by foliage. But I’m nitpicking and haven’t got a lot to complain about.(Image credit score: Michael Hicks / Android Central)The greatest distinction is in elevation achieve. Alltrails estimates that my path’s elevation achieve is 2,208 ft, which suggests all three overestimated my elevation achieve by a good portion, with Polar exaggerating the least and COROS the furthest off. The Forerunner 965 and COROS PACE 3 each did higher in my earlier elevation check, so I’m not sure if this can be a case of Alltrails being off or all three watches “gaining” top when my GPS map drifts off slopes and again onto the trail. Coros vs. Garmin vs. Polar: Heart fee accuracy(Image credit score: Michael Hicks / Android Central)To check these watches’ accuracy, I wore a Polar H10 chest strap throughout my preliminary two runs to see how they dealt with sudden modifications in coronary heart fee. Here’s what I realized:For the primary 5K portion of my run, all three watches averaged 159 bpm, whereas the Polar H10 (purple) averaged 160 bpm. As you may see within the chart beneath, all three watches confirmed common, minute modifications in coronary heart fee that intently matched each other, whereas Polar (purple) had just a few moments the place its information spiked above the watches earlier than falling again to the pack. (Image credit score: Android Central)Frankly, I’m a bit skeptical I hit 170 bpm at a pedestrian tempo so early in my run, so I’m wanting askance at Polar’s chest strap right here. For the remainder of the run, all the watches greater than matched it, which I’m completely happy about. For the monitor exercise, the Polar H10’s coronary heart fee chart obtained screwed up due to logistical causes I will not bore you with, however I can a minimum of share the averages: the H10 measured 172 bpm, whereas the Vantage V3 measured 173 bpm. The VERTIX 2S had 170 bpm, and the Forerunner 965 had 171 bpm. (Image credit score: Android Central)All three watches seemingly had their points throughout this exercise. Garmin had deflated coronary heart fee information in the course of the first lap, COROS had deflated numbers throughout laps 5 and 6, and Polar apparently does not monitor your coronary heart fee once you pause a exercise, maintaining a flat consequence till you resume. Overall, I’d say that Garmin and Polar did the perfect in total accuracy, whereas COROS struggled barely throughout arduous sprints as a result of the cumbersome design makes it prone to wobble in your wrist. Then once more, folks aren’t shopping for the VERTIX 2S for sprints however somewhat for actions with way more deliberate, slow-paced movement. And on different actions like mountain climbing, the VERTIX 2S has accomplished exceedingly nicely for coronary heart fee information.Analyzing the outcomes(Image credit score: Michael Hicks / Android Central)I can not inform you if the unique VERTIX 2 was particularly inaccurate, however up to now, I’m happy with the upgraded HR and dual-frequency GPS outcomes for the VERTIX 2S.For the overall health comparability, the COROS VERTIX 2S carried out finest for GPS accuracy, the Garmin Forerunner 965 finest (or least iffy) for coronary heart fee, and the Polar Vantage V3 finest for elevation accuracy. Still, not one of the outcomes had been definitive, and I’d say they’re all in the identical ballpark.That may change throughout extra testing, in principle. But repeatedly carrying three smartwatches for exercises is an annoying problem, so I’ll focus extra particularly on the COROS VERTIX 2S and Polar Vantage V3 within the coming days for his or her respective evaluations to supply extra context.