Since 2015, the smart ring market has experienced significant growth with Oura entering the scene. This fourth-generation model now competes against newer players like Ultrahuman. Currently, Oura leads in sales with over a million users, while Ultrahuman has emerged as its strongest competitor, offering comparable features in a similarly sleek package. Given their distinct features, which of the two smart rings is better?
Similarities Between Smart Ring Devices
Evaluating these two smart rings reveals several key similarities that stand out. Specifically, essential track metrics, including sleep patterns, activity levels, body temperature, and heart rate, can be tracked on both devices. Likewise, they’re designed more like jewelry than technology, prioritizing comfort and style as they rank among the lightest wearable options available. Although Oura offers more color choices in its standard lineup, Ultrahuman caters to luxury buyers with premium Rare editions at a more expensive cost.
Oura also has practical considerations coming into play, providing twelve sizing options compared to Ultrahuman’s ten. However, both companies supply sizing kits to ensure proper fit, which is critical for accurate data collection. Comparatively, Oura’s battery performance of eight days shows a slight advantage over Ultrahuman’s six. Still, both smart rings exceed industry standards, with compatibility spanning iOS and Android platforms for each.
Since these smart rings have closely matched specifications, one’s personal preference remains the driving force when deciding to purchase. From contemplating between an extended battery life or its various designs, the luxury appeal of these high-end models may justify their cost. The smart ring market continues evolving with both brands demonstrating how subtle distinctions can shape consumer choice in an increasingly competitive space.
Exploring the Oura Smart Ring
Connectivity and app integration become key differentiators when deciding between these leading smart ring options. For users prioritizing third-party compatibility, the Oura smart ring may be the best choice as it offers seamless links with popular platforms, namely Apple Health, Google Health Connect, and fitness services including Strava and MyFitnessPal. Unfortunately, this expanded functionality has a downside, as Oura users will need separate subscriptions for premium features on linked apps, despite its ability to connect to these services.
On the other hand, the Ultrahuman smart ring is perfectly suited for those less concerned with external integrations. Although it provides its ecosystem through PowerPlugs, it has limited outside connectivity. In contrast, smart features like Automatic Activity Detection, which identifies workouts without manual input, and a thoughtful Rest Mode that adjusts tracking during illness or recovery give Oura additional advantages. Currently, Ultrahuman lacks similar recovery-focused settings that, according to user reports, may lead to less accurate feedback during health breaks.
These smart ring options are further distinguished by price considerations, with Oura carrying a significant upfront cost between $349-$499, plus a $69.99 annual subscription for full functionality. While his device may be technically usable without membership, it still offers a severely limited experience. However, this tradeoff may influence budget-conscious buyers to lean towards Oura as their preferred smart device. Furthermore, those willing to invest in comprehensive health tracking with extensive app networks may find the ring more beneficial. Meanwhile, Ultrahuman may be ideal for a more self-contained system with lower ongoing costs.
Exploring the Ultrahuman Smart Ring
Users seeking comprehensive fitness tracking without recurring fees may be lured in by the Ultrahuman ring, which presents a compelling alternative. Matching Oura’s base models, the Ultrahuman has a competitively priced option of $349, eliminating mandatory subscriptions. Moreover, core features, like movement tracking, sleep analysis, stress measurement, and reproductive health insights in the initial purchase, are also included in the Ultrahuman device. To further distinguish itself, this ring has premium finishes that would incur additional costs with competitors.
Optional upgrades, such as the $24 annual Cardio Adaptability add-on or glucose-monitoring M1 sensors ($299 monthly), exist as well. Still, users can find substantial value in the ring without these extras. Its proactive coaching approach is the most appreciated among users. Compared to other passive data collection, regular updates and reminders can create a more guided experience. Using this hands-on methodology, fitness-focused individuals who prefer detailed metrics and accountability may resonate more.
According to independent reviews, the Ultrahuman’s perceived accuracy advantage over rival devices is frequently highlighted, though individual experiences may vary. For dedicated wellness enthusiasts prioritizing actionable insights over third-party integrations, this smart ring’s blend of upfront pricing, granular data presentation, and motivational features makes it a suitable option. Separating itself from other subscription-dependent alternatives, the ring maintains full functionality without ongoing payments. Ultimately, cost-conscious consumers may choose this option, seeking long-term value in their wearable investment.
Things to Consider Before Buying
Multiple factors, such as cost, battery performance, wearability, aesthetic design, and available functionalities, were incorporated into the evaluation process for comparing these devices. In particular, customers in the United States market are given specific pricing and feature specifications. Furthermore, both the Finnish-developed Oura and India-based Ultrahuman distribute their products internationally, though their pricing structures and feature availability are affected by existing regional variations. When diving into the competitive smart ring market, potential buyers should explore regional websites or authorized retailers to confirm the exact capabilities and costs applicable to their location.
