Why Standalone Fitness Bands Are Outselling All Other Wearables, Including Apple Watch

Why Standalone Fitness Bands Are Outselling All Other Wearables, Including Apple Watch
Text Size
- +

Toggle Dark Mode

Physical fitness has become an increasingly popular trend in recent years, as more and more people hit the gym, more often. What’s become just as popular, however — thanks to technological advancements, galore, are wearable devices, such as fitness bands, and even Apple’s Watch.

These wrist-hugging, mini computers are capable of tracking almost every aspect of our personal workouts — including steps taken, calories burned, and even our heart rate, among other vital exercise-related data.

Yet Apple’s Watch, in particular — which will run you anywhere between $299 and well over $10,000, (depending on the model and configuration of your choosing), is obviously a lot more expensive than the majority of traditional, wearable fitness bands on the market today. Devices such as offerings from Fitbit, for instance, tend to run anywhere between $50 to a little over $200.

Even still, while Apple Watch can do so much more than simply track fitness statistics, it’s the standalone fitness trackers that actually outsell Apple Watch — and by an impressive margin, too, according to a new research report published Wednesday

As a matter of fact, analysts at Kantar WorldPanel ComTech, found in a survey that traditional fitness trackers — such as those from the likes of Fitbit and Garmin — outsell Apple’s Watch in America by a ratio of 4:1. In other words, for every four wearables purchased by American consumers, only one is an Apple Watch. This statistic is hardly a representative figure, however, as Kantar’s survey revealed that only 12.2% of Americans have purchased a wearable device, to date.

So obviously there’s still a lot of room for the market to grow.

In terms of market share, Kantar’s survey revealed that Fitbit — makers of devices such as the Charge HR and Blaze — accounted for a whopping 61.7 percent of total active wearable devices; whereas, in comparison, Apple’s Watch comprised only 6.8 percent.

Factors such as brand, ease of use, and functionality were of utmost importance to buyers surveyed — at least, significantly more so than were others, such as the physical design of the produce and its cost. And these factors are clearly represented in the survey’s findings.

Also, while Apple is a globally recognized brand, the broader majority of standalone fitness trackers, as we mentioned, cost a lot less than Apple’s Watch — which, from a user friendliness vantage point, is much more complicated to use and interact with while on-the-run than are devices such as Fitbit’s Charge or Garmin’s Vivofit.

Fitbit’s CEO, James Park, in a recent interview actually indicated that he believes Apple was wrong in its approach in trying to capture a share of the wearable market by launching the Watch. He indicated that, as a “computing platform,” in and of itself, the device is simply much more difficult to use — especially if all you want to know are the core stats of your workout.

What are your thoughts about Apple Watch being the proverbial ‘under dog’ in the wearables market? Do you think this will change when the company releases its Apple Watch 2 later this year? Let us know in the comments!

Sponsored
Social Sharing