Charge 3 calories not accurate

[Dave_M_G]

Since 2015, I have owned a Fitbit Charge, Charge 2, and I now currently own a Charge 3.

With the Charge 1 and Charge 2, I found the calorie burn rates were in line with my expectations. I keep meticulous records of my calorie intake, and record my results with the help of a body fat % measurement machine at my gym. With the help of my Charge 1 and Charge 2, I was able to meet my goals pretty much exactly on target.

Since getting my Charge 3 about a month ago, almost right away I could tell something was off. My exercises were showing high calorie burn results. Then I found that I was gaining weight.

I still had my Charge 2, so I tried wearing both for a while, and discovered that the Charge 3 is reporting around 10% more calories burned than the Charge 2, as can be seen in the pictures below.

While it would be nice to think that the Charge 3 is now more accurate, meaning that I've been burning more calories than I've thought for the last few years, that just doesn't seem to be the case. My record keeping since before owning any any Fitbit, and through owning the Charge and Charge 2, has been consistent, and the Charge and Charge 2 provided predictable and consistent results. The outlier is the Charge 3. For the Charge 3 to be accurate, it would mean everything else I've ever done is wrong, which is not impossible, but a strong case would have to be made for where I'm going awry.

Is there any way the Charge 3 can be calibrated to lower the burn rate? Is there a flaw in the way it is calculating calories? What are the options for dealing with this?

Moderator edit: updated subject for clarity

[MarreFitbit]

Hey there @Dave_M_G, it's nice to see you here! Thanks for taking the time to share your experience with Charge 3 and Charge 3. Thanks for the pictures provided, nice way to go!

The algorithms used in both devices are the same, so you should see no more than a standard 4% variation between the two. It's possible to get different readings if the trackers are worn in different locations (dominant vs non-dominant wrist). We recommend reviewing the accuracy information provided on our help site at help.fitbit.com. 

As you may know, calorie burn is based on two factors: your basal metabolic rate (or BMR) and activity tracked by your device. 

For more details, see: How does Fitbit estimate how many calories I've burned?

Hope this helps, keep me posted! 

[Dave_M_G]

MarreFitbit,

Thank yo for responding, but, you seem to be completely overlooking the problem.

You state there should be no more than 4% variance. In the pictures provided, there is clearly much more variance than that.

You state that wearing devices on different wrists can provide different results, but the picture is of the devices on the same wrist.

All the information about my body is exactly the same for both devices, as they both referenced the exact same app.

In short, you haven't actually said anything that addresses the issue. The Charge 3 is showing roughly 10% more burn than the Charge 2. All your possibilities have already been covered..

So what can be done about it?

[c0rky]

Dave, interested in your thread. My Fitbit Charge 3 seems to overstate calories relative to Runkeeper. Did you happen to learn more about calorie computation by Charge 3 or any remedial steps to improve accuracy?

---

@Dave_M_G wrote:

MarreFitbit,

Thank yo for responding, but, you seem to be completely overlooking the problem.

You state there should be no more than 4% variance. In the pictures provided, there is clearly much more variance than that.

You state that wearing devices on different wrists can provide different results, but the picture is of the devices on the same wrist.

All the information about my body is exactly the same for both devices, as they both referenced the exact same app.

In short, you haven't actually said anything that addresses the issue. The Charge 3 is showing roughly 10% more burn than the Charge 2. All your possibilities have already been covered..

So what can be done about it?

---

[cazkeiss]

Hey, did you manage to find a solution to this? I've just switched from a Blaze to a Charge 3 and am finding the exact same issue which completely throws tracking a calorie deficit out the window!

[Dave_M_G]

No, Fitbit has not provided any reasonable response or solution.

The only workaround is to set your calorie burn goals higher than you would normally. For example, if you want to have a 500 calorie per day deficit, set the diet plan at -750 instead.

Also, round up heavily when entering calories.

The bottom line is that the Fitbit Charge 3 is inaccurate, you have to take some silly steps to counter that, and Fitbit is not doing anything about it.

[Anodyne2k]

So the mod actually gave you good information. The software is no different. What you ignored for some odd reason is the wrist placement of the tracker. If accurate HR cannot be achieved you are guaranteed to get wildly varying results. Fitbit makes it abundantly clear when reading how to use these trackers to NOT. keep them on your wrist bone area but to keep your tracker where you show your Charge 2 in the photo. My Charge 2 always overestimate my calorie burn (they always do so if challenge your awareness of this fact) and I've had to estimate a 20% reduction in calories burned to find what I think is a reliable number for calories burned on the Charge 2. But if you keep your tracker near your wrist bone area where you can feel that bone lump you usually will experience a 5-20% over estimation of your heart rate which makes the software calculate more calorie burn. Just a leisure walk has shown me at a 135 HR before when it should be around 100-110 depending on intensity.

This is not an exact science. Perhaps some issues with the tracker itself do exist but I promise you that your Charge 2 data is wrong because clinical studies have shown no tracker outside of maybe the old BodyBugg by Body media (acquired by Jawbone) to be within 10% accuracy when exercising at any time within a 24 hr period. So make sure you are keeping your tracker up to 3 finger widths up from your wrist area when you exercise and know that it's still going to be wrong.

I also have to include calorie counting can be errant. I'm a former personal trainer and the #1 reason people didn't see their desired results were that they were dishonest in their food tracking and portion measurements and they weren't pushing themselves hard enough to the intended results. Double check everything. Also make sure you're not taking fake steps when doing sedentary activities like sitting or driving. A drive can add hundreds of false steps and requires a correction in activity tracking to walk those errors back. Otherwise you're getting credit for activities you didn't perform. 

[JoannaBu]

I’m having the same problem, which appeared immediately after I retired my Charge 2 and started using a Charge 3. By using my calories burned relative to calories in estimates provided by Fitbit, I’ve gained more than 5 lbs in the last 6 months. I buy this product for the express purpose of accurately estimating calories burned. It is defective. And I’m not sure what to do. Have you gotten any farther with Fitbit?

[pablothian]

Mine is dreadful. I do lots of walking and my daily rate has jumped from 2.5k to 3k on the same activity. I can smile about the extra pound a week I’ll lose but it is clearly nonsense. I’m good at recording calories and the previous Fitbit flex 2 was always slightly generous. Weight and all other characteristics the same. 

This is one is ridiculous.

You’re not making sense. Clearly there is an issue and it needs sorting. 

Moderator edit: merged reply

[Dave_M_G]

Anodyne2k, sorry, but your defense of the Charge 3 does not pursuade me.

Here's a further test you can run. Put your Charge 3 into an exercise mode, for example, running, and then sit still and watch TV and do nothing. You will see your calorie burn go up as if you were jogging around the block.

The Charge 3 in exercise mode makes too many assumptions about what you might be doing, instead of simply extrapolating from your heart rate, which is what the Charge HR used to do (as far as I can tell).

As many others here are reporting, the Charge 3 is far too generous in the count of distance, calories, and steps. I can't say for sure about the other two, but it is definitely too generous on calories, regardless of where on my wrist it is placed.

[Dave_M_G · Accepted solution]

For anyone who is also experiencing this problem, I have found one way to get slightly better calorie reporting from the Charge 3: NEVER use any of the exercise modes. They simply assume too much, and add on calories burned regardless of if you are actually doing the activity you've selected.

No matter what exercise you do, simply leave the Charge 3 in it's basic tracking mode. It means you won't see data for the duration of your exercise, but it does mean that your overall calorie burn for the day will be more conservative and closer to reality.

Since I've stopped using any exercise mode, I've noticed my calorie burn rates are more believable, and my weight loss has been more on target.

This is obviously a poor workaround for a problem that should not exist, but until Fitbit offers a firmware or software update that directly addresses this issue, then this is the best option in my opinion.

Hope that helps someone.

[pablothian]

That makes reasonable sense. When I walk and track the walk it will say (actual voice) I have burned around 400 calories in an hour but then will say that the exercise has burned more like 700 when I review it.

However, this ruins a major part of the point of having one of these in the first place.

Sent from my iPad

[sko_tang]

@pablothianYou are absolutely correct!  I never paid attention to calories burnt until I started tracking calories intake.  Based on your suggestion I turned on calories voice cue and tested with my normal walks.  At every km the voice cue reported consistently around 46 calories burnt with an average pace of 11'27".  Today I walked 5.59 km (1 hour 04 min) so I should have burnt 257 calories (46 x 5.59) but Fitbit reported 409 which is 152 calories or 59% more!

@Dave_M_GYou are also correct that Charge 3 over counts calories when in exercise tracking.

At this point I have no idea what to believe in any of the metrics reported by Charge 3 anymore.  I know for a fact the floor counts are erroneous and erratic with outdoor activities (it usually adds 10-30 floors easily to my walks on level ground and mowing the lawn and there is no tools to edit that); heart rate is often not showing for a couple of minutes when I am on the elliptical machine and then spiking to 20 points higher before settling down to something more reasonable (thereby skewing the average); step counts tend to be over-generous (my 8000 steps reported by my previous Mi Band 3 = 10000 Fitbit steps).

All these have been reported from many different threads over the last 6 - 7 months.  Many of the threads have been incorrectly labelled as "SOLVED" when clearly the problems still exist!  Moderators have been giving canned responses from templates with no real solutions.  App updates so far have not fixed these issues.  As a matter of fact, I stopped doing any update since 2.95 (1.60.39) lest the dreaded "new and improved" dashboard is going to replace the existing user interface (one of the few remaining things I still enjoy from Fitbit.)

[willowonyx]

I wanted to chime in on this, as I just got a Charge 3 and been having the exact opposite issue. Below are my two posts: 

I have been using a Garmin910xt for years in tracking my workouts (heart rate strap). I wore my new Fitbit Charge 3 and the Garmin this morning while on my run.  My parameters (H,W, etc) are exactly the same in both. Both registered my avg BPM as 151. So just based on those parameters, the calorie count should have been exactly the same. But they were not. For my 65 min run, the Garmin registered 643 calories and my Fitbit says 547. Any ideas?

Someone please help me with this issue! Below are details on my elliptical/kettlebell workout and the discrepancies. If you use any online calories calculation setup, with the H,W, age etc and input even the Fitbit readings, the calorie count is way higher. Also, when I was doing some of the kettlebell moves, I would compare my fitbit bpm to the Garmin bpm, and fitbit would be 10-40 bpm off, there were a few times my heart felt like it was going to burst out of my chest (Garmin said 169 bpm) and the fitbit would say 120 bpm.

Fitbit

Elliptical 1 - 8 mins, avg bpm 130, calories 46

Weights - 41 mins, avg bpm 134, calories 260

Elliptical 2 - 10 mins, avg bpm 147, calories 78

Garmin 910xt

Elliptical 1 - 9 mins, avg bpm 126, calories 73

Weights - 42 mins, avg bpm 143, calories 369

Elliptical 2 - 11 mins, avg bpm 145, calories 99

[JC_Preston]

Thanks for the advice, I just got my Charge 3 and have been using it for 3 days and already noticed the calorie problem. I will keep away from the excercise feature and see the difference. 👍🏻

[STLcomet]

@Dave_M_G  @JC_Preston (these are the only two comments I read other then the mods response) Just real quick, the Charge 3 calorie burn is without a doubt pretty accurate, within 5%. And waayyyy more accurate then any device I've had. I think it's the better accuracy with the Resting Heart Rate including while sleeping. My previous estimated RHR that I calculated with my old Charge 2 was around 64-67 when it was actually 57-58. Which in my case, meant I burned 20% more calories when in NEAT and 24% more while in stress then the Charge 2 and I had to adjust it daily. Plus with the realtime GPS the Charge 3 does at least take terrain and elevation into the equation.

Only reason I know factually is, I am a soccer coach, mid 30's, and very active myself and have had always had male kids from 17-25yo have their burn rate with O2 levels tested. The University I work has provided fitbits to their athletes and coaches, at least the athletes on my team and the female equivalent team, for athlete accountability and coaching guidance and monitoring. We got our Charge 3s in November 2018, replacing Charge 2s and some Charge 1s.

Since then we've (including myself) had 3 RMR tests with a Korr Metabolic Analyzer and ICU testing. We all usually change the exercise modes for each different module. So I've got oodles of data, including energy asserted vs burn vs NEAT, from the walking, running, interval, aerobic 'workout', biking, rowing, and weight lifting modes while actually using the gold standards in metabolic testing. 

So really you have gotten a reasonable response from fitbit, you just don't believe they know more about their product then you do. I don't mean to be cross here but the issues you keep insisting and telling others is false. You do not know more about fitbit technology then fitbit itself does. Come on now. And to insist that they explain that in detail for you to think it's a reasonable answer is an unreasonable ask.

Like someone else mentioned, there is a ton that goes into the calculation of all the info fitbit gives through its tech. Thousands of hours of R&D and financial investment. Fitbit clearly would not release a monitoring system that was less technologically advanced as its previous model(s). Its not a glitch, its updated technology and increased knowledge of exercise science and biochemistry.

[pablothian]

First is that my old Fitbit measures completely differently than my new one. So one of them is wrong. Fact.

Second is that I was careful about my calorie measurement and the old Fitbit matched the weight loss/gain I saw closer than the new one. Fact.

Third is that there was a 1lb a week difference between the 2. Fact.

I don’t generally complain about stuff but that is a massively material difference in the way they measure. I proved it to them too. Equivalent days and steps with a 600 calorie difference in apparent burn. Utter rubbish.

I now think I know why. I have a very low resting heart (50-55) Therefore it thinks I’m doing stuff all the time. Old one didn’t have a heart monitor.

There is something wrong with it. It I ate and exercised to the pattern it suggests I would be about 20 stone by now. Anyway it works if I tell it I’m 7 stone. Not ideal but it now works between what I eat, drink and do.



Sent from my iPhone

[SoberDadLiving]

My Charge 3 is secure on my nondominate wrist and on workout days it's measuring 4.5k calories burned and on days with no exercise at all it's measuring 3.8k calories burned.  Needless to say that's completely absurd.  Doing the actual math myself I burn about 2.5k calories each day.  The heartrate monitor on the Charge 3 seems accurate so I don't understand how the calorie counter can be so far off.  My Samsung FitPro2 had a much better calorie counter.  I think I'm just going to return the Fitbit, it can't do the only thing I actually wanted it for. 

[Dave_M_G]

@STLcomet, with due respect to your measuring experiences, you are missing the point.

I am not making objective claims about whether or not the Fitbit Charge 3 conforms to standards set by other third party measuring systems. I am only claiming that the Fitbit Charge 3 is measuring significantly differently than the Charge HR and Charge 2. I was told by Fitbit that the variance between models should not be more than 4%, but I have measured variance as high as 12% in some instances.

I have also experimented with exercise modes while doing the selected exercise and while sitting still and doing nothing and seen that the calorie burn is nearly the same, which makes no sense in any context.

This are tests and measurements I can do myself, and are not disproved by any of the claims you make comparing your Fitbit to other devices.

I'm glad you are satisfied with the product, but the flaws that I have found are tangible, measurable, and demonstrable.

Further, this claim:

---

Thousands of hours of R&D and financial investment. Fitbit clearly would not release a monitoring system that was less technologically advanced as its previous model(s).

---

I have had to replace Fitbits under warranty that stop working for no particular reason multiple times now. For a company that puts so much into their tech as you claim, they sure seem to lack in developing performance, durability, and reliability. I am not as faithful as you that corporations do the best possible work on all their products.

[Ahealthyman]

@Dave_M_G  Thank you for speaking for the people!

Echoed your thoughts throughout the debate. Very frustrating to be given a generic answer that does not address the points raised. 

I think Fitbit underestimates the relentlessness of most Fitbit users who are passionate about their fitness/aesthetic goals. I have every faith that you are diligently tracking calories in and being as objective as possible in the pursuit of accuracy. I also have zero faith in posts that flatly object this. Suspicious to say the least.