Surge vs. Charge 2 vs. Alta HR, 11-day comparison (steps & calories)

[Dominique]

I’ve now been wearing my new Alta HR for 11 full days, on the same arm as my Charge 2:

For those interested, the band on the Charge 2 is the Cobalt Sport Band (purchased on Fitbit’s store), while the band on the Alta HR is Fuchsia (it doesn’t look as pink in real). I’m wearing them on my right wrist (dominant arm) and I’m wearing my Surge on my left wrist (non-dominant arm). Each tracker is connected to a separate account (so I’m not using the Multi-Tracker feature that lets you connect several trackers to the same account).

Here are my step counts with each tracker:

and here are calories burned according to each tracker:

I had posted a similar comparison of Surge vs. Charge 2 over a longer period (17 weeks). The new numbers confirm the previous ones for Surge & Charge 2: Charge 2 credits me with significantly more steps, but calories are quite close.  Interestingly, Charge 2 and Alta HR are very similar in terms of steps, but Alta HR inflates calories by 11% compared to Surge, and 7% compared to Charge 2.

[bcalvanese]

nice comparison.

Did you compare the Blaze by any chance?

The Charge 2 became my favorite, but since the latest Blaze update, the Blaze is now my favorite.

[Dominique]

@bcalvanese: no, unfortunately I have no comparisons that involve Blaze . 

[WendyB]

Interesting. The Surge seems to come in consistently lower

[Esya]

@WendyB

Could be because it is worn on the non-dominant hand. Not saying that is the cause, but it does have an impact on the results. But I understand @Dominique cannot wear 3 trackers on the same arm.

[Mukluk4]

The step count difference between the surge and the others can just be arm placement which may also explain the calorie burn.

The real question is which has the most accurate calorie burn?

[Dominique]

---

@Mukluk4 wrote:

The step count difference between the surge and the others can just be arm placement which may also explain the calorie burn.

The real question is which has the most accurate calorie burn?

---

Fitbit "knows" whether a tracker is on a dominant or non-dominant arm and should take that into account. However, it’s quite possible the dominant arm overemphasizes activity, especially on lower-activity days (less "real" stepping). I guess one way to find out would be to swap trackers from one arm to the other for a week or so, and see what happens.

As to the most accurate calorie burn, I wouldn’t know since I don’t track my intake. My bets would be on the Surge, though. Its lower numbers are closer to what I’d get with online calculators.

[Mukluk4]

With the calorie burn within roughly 10% of each other, I would not consider any of them an outlier and reasonably accurate.  

With the Surge step count outside of that range against both products, there is definitely something else going on that isn't just tracker based.