Garmin -> Polar, why switch from the market leader to the og Sports Watch?
I recently researched why people leave the Garmin watch ecosystem to move to Polar. Here are the reasons I found people gave, plus my opinion next to each reason to say whether or not I think the criticism is justified.
Key Reasons for Switching to Polar
- Simpler & More Focused Features – essential training metrics without Garmin’s perceived “data bloat” (e.g., Body Battery, Endurance Score). OPINION. True.
- Battery Life – especially for endurance athletes and ultra-runners. Challenger brand Coros is perhaps the overall leader for better battery life, but Garmin comes close and wins if you add its solar options into the mix. OPINION: Untrue…select Polar watches still have excellent battery life, but Garmin tends to edge it for watches of the same generation.
- User-friendly watch interface – OPINION: True. The menus and button actions on a Polar watch are easy to navigate. This is because Polar has fewer options to accommodate. Also, I consider the aesthetics of Polar watch faces and menus, which I think are not great; however, its in-watch data screen is as good as those on any other sports watch.
- Faster, Smoother OS – Reddit users mention that Polar watches are much smoother and snappier when used regularly. OPINION: True. I would generally agree with this to the point where I would even say that Garmin artificially lowers device speeds to keep battery life high. Both Garmin and Polar have historically had lag issues when panning and zooming on map pages.
- More accurate GPS – OPINION: False. Previous generation Garmin watches were widely claimed to be accurate by numerous media sites, but this wasn’t true. Garmin gained a bad rap for the inaccuracy experienced by real users and in my tests over a decade. However, Garmin’s current generation of dual-frequency chipsets (Airoha) is amongst the most accurate ever. Polar uses similar dual-frequency chipsets (Sony) but can’t get the same level of performance as Garmin at present due to antenna design, power supply or other factors. But this probably only matters in niche scenarios under trees, in urban areas, near cliffs or when looking for instant pace accuracy (Stryd is best for the latter).
- Few Smart Feature Distractions – Polar lacks tap and go payments, support for streaming services and other smart features – OPINION: True, if you don’t want smart features. However, the clear trend is for ever-smarter and more complex watches, leaving those of you who want a simple sports watch just for sport behind.
- Native, Integrated Power Metrics only from Polar OPINION: Mostly False. Both Garmin and Polar can calculate running power solely from the watch. Within both ecosystems, power is recorded natively. However, what is true is that Garmin records running power in a proprietary (but native!) way. This causes Garmin/you two issues 1) running power cannot be quite so easily used throughout its ecosystem as other metrics, 2) an external Stryd running power pod can never integrate with Garmin’s proprietary running power, but Stryd does integrate excellently using garmin’s CIQ ecosystem. Confusing!
- Better Pricing – Polar is seen to use better hardware components at lower price points. OPINION: Generally true. This has been the case historically, but remember that part of the Garmin premium is for its wider feature set. Polar’s Grit X2 Pro also introduced strangely high pricing that sat poorly against Garmin Fenix alternatives.
- Lower Cost for Core Sports Features – OPINION: True, Polar gives the core features and more besides.
- User-Friendly App Interface: Polar FLOW has a clean and intuitive design. OPINION: Probably true, but Garmin has improved and has more information to show us, making achieving greater usability more difficult. Polar FLOW’s smartphone app now looks a little dated, and its web-based FLOW ecosystem looks very dated – that said, I love to use FLOW on my PC because it is so user-friendly.
- More accurate heart rate from Precision PRIME & ELIXIR: OPINION: False. There are three broad components to heart rate accuracy: workout accuracy, sleep/rest accuracy and resting HRV accuracy. Reviewers, including myself, never test all three well and tend to focus on the former. Garmins are less accurate at resting levels and hence at HRV – the likes of @TheQuantifiedScientist show this, and he is the only reviewer who correctly delves into this specific accuracy topic. Regarding workout accuracy, you will find that dcrainmaker’s thorough results favour Garmin over Polar, but you will find that my thorough tests show many Garmin OHR inaccuracies. This is because workout accuracy varies according to the wearer’s physiology, environmental conditions and the specific movement in the exercise. It’s just a fact that optical heart rate is not scientifically accurate compared to a chest strap on a population level. Take what anyone says with a pinch of salt and buy a Polar H10/H9 strap.
- Lightweight Design & Comfort – Polar certainly have light watches like the M3. OPINION: True but… Garmin Forerunners are light, too. I’d accept that some may say Fenix is too heavy, but the same could be said of Grit X2.
- More consistent training load tracking OPINION: True but... Polar assesses muscular load when power is available (run/bike); Garmin doesn’t do that. Polar’s calculation still won’t work in gym workouts, though, as it doesn’t measure power in that setting.
- Garmin Connect now requires a subscription to get all features. OPINION: True … oh wait a minute.
But it’s a 2-way street, and some people moving to Polar miss these Garmin features.
Things Users Miss from Garmin
- PacePro & Race Planning Tools – Garmin’s PacePro is highly valued for pacing races, especially by trail and road runners on hilly courses. OPINION: True
- Music & Smart Features – Polar lacks streaming music support and contactless payments. OPINION: True. Although Polar sells a non biometrically authenticated payment strap.
- Better Ecosystem & App Integration – Garmin’s longstanding ecosystem (Garmin Connect, bike computers, sensors, integration) is more comprehensive. OPINION: True. That’s why you pay more for a Garmin.
Take Out
Not everyone wants every possible feature or has feature-FOMO. If that describes you, Polar is a good brand to research when upgrading.
You might lose or miss your data history in Garmin Connect if you change platforms, but if you’ve always relied on an external ecosystem like Strava, Polar FLOW will send your new workouts there easily enough.
Perhaps you are an athlete and want more certainty in heart-rate led metrics. If that’s you, Polar is a good choice.
April 2025 – What should I buy? Garmin or Polar
It’s a tricky time to make an informed purchase. There is a lot of competition, and prices are almost certainly likely to rise due to the impact of US tariffs on the global economy.
Polar prices tend to be initially priced keenly, but are more reasonable when discounted in sales. Garmin has a similar discounting strategy. The point is that if you look to buy around the usual sale periods, you will likely find good Garmin and Polar deals on a year-old or two-year-old model. But April is prime time as we kit up for our warm-weather activities, and getting a deal might be tricky.
Spring will almost certainly see the generation of Garmin Forerunner watches, but perhaps nothing from Polar.
More: Buy a Polar here
the5krunner.com © 2010-2025
Reader-Powered Content
For the last 6 years or so I’ve been using Garmin but I’m not sure another Garmin watch again. I find their mapping feature quite helpful. I use Garmin pay every single day. Music feature is very helpful as well. But I really don’t need all the other bloatware.
Not to forget: if I dump Garmin I’ll miss ClimbPro and NextFork.
I’d rather shoot for a Suunto than a Polar watch.
if you’re liking garmin pay, garmin maps and streming music services on garmin then you’ll do well to get those elsewhere!
I am not sure about Polar power, but Garmin power while native is trash. I just run on treadmill with fixed speed and in 5 minutes garmin increased my power from 250W to 350W, while Stryd accurately kept the power constant at 200W. While the scale of data is not a problem that Garmin is higher, the fact that their power is not stable is quite useless then.
yes
Two problems that are however very important, to solve for Polar
– crash behaviour (at least save the data please, should not be too difficult)
– integration with 3th party training platforms: very important for high level training. (Works with Garmin, Suunto, Coros, Apple…)
which 3rd parties do you mean?
recently there was training peaks plan integration: https://the5krunner.com/2025/03/18/polar-introduces-trainingpeaks-integration-for-structured-workouts/
As PeterB has already indicated, Polar has a long tradition of suddenly crashing. But that’s just the tip of the iceberg. I have worn Polar watches (all top models) for 27 years and I have to laugh when I read TFK’s post.
I think many users think primarily as (bored?) consumers, not as tormented athletes.
A lot of people don’t realise what it takes for a sports watch to keep an athlete happy every day for years.
After the (again unspeakable) Vantage V3, I switched to Garmin’s 965 and saw and still see a completely different league of hardware and software. I want to say it from the heart, even if it sounds like an advertising slogan: Never again Polar! Only Garmin.
Polar has (always) offered only the simplest, sometimes frighteningly poor hardware and Polar Flow (I also know the previous software, some readers were not yet born when it came onto the market) is a fraction of what Garmin software offers. I’m a regular competitor and I know what I’m talking about (for 27 years …).
I’ve used polar since the s620, so perhaps not quite as long as you. i still have a s720 next to me somewhere. happy days. faster days.
“A lot of people don’t realise what it takes for a sports watch to keep an athlete happy every day for years.” I suspect a watch that keeps anyone happy is one that has the functions the owner needs/wants and that those functions work reliably and efficiently. how many metrics would you show during a workout? and would they be the same as my chosen ones?…probably not (tho I guess we are probably more similar than you think). other people want their notifications, others music and so on.
Hello TFK,
Thank you for your response.
I see that we are talking past each other. 🙂
Athletes who know Polar and Garmin know about the small, sometimes unnamed important features that are found below the big consumer reviews.
Let me put it this way: you can’t save a person from buying the wrong things until they have had the negative experience themselves. That can sometimes take a very long time 😉
The fact that it was 27 years for me also had to do with the fact that I was emotionally attached to Polar. Younger buyers today no longer understand this because we no longer live in the 1980s.
Today’s buyers are conditioned very differently. There is a lot of talk and (superficial) comparisons. Many people are unaware of some great functionalities in real life or do not (yet) understand their significance. But there they are, the differences between the brands’ products.
And when I look at the big road races, they’re very different from the way they used to be. Today, “everyone” is there – it’s an event, not so much a sporting event. Golden times for product marketers and manufacturers. And as the times are, so are the customers.
Okay, I really don’t care what people buy. I’ve learned my lesson. Better late than never. 😀
Translated with DeepL.com (free version)
yes i agree with that.
polar has “tap to lap” and “zone lock” both of which are excellent, albeit niche features.
those, once new, features fade into insignificance as new reviews come out. for example, how could any review cover all of garmin’s features? people simply dont read long reviews and thats why i stopped doing them; i might list major feature areas or highlight some old features that i think are particularly useful but whose to say the features that i think are important are improtant for you?
not sure about your maths tho 😉 1980+27=…
PS: Das ist ein Beispiel für echte, realitätsnahe Funktionalität: Deepl. 😉
Hi, i’m starting a personal test of an Amazfit Active 2, compared to my Fenix 7Xss.
– for the moment, strength training is better on the Amazfit Active 2 …
– Amazfit (Zepp App) is also able to filter notifications from the iPhone to my watch. Garmin is not capable 😉
–> i will test Trail Run with turn-by-turn navigation today.
Sehr guter Beitrag. Ich selber habe die 920 die 935 955 solar. Ich spekuliert immer auf eine 975 solar. Aber da von garmin nichts kommt oder sonst so kommt das mann ein Abo haben muss das brauche ich nicht. Da jetzt stehe ich gerade vor dem Kauf einer Polar für mich als spitzenläufer und ab und zu mal etwas schwimmen reicht eine polar auch. Dazu ist sie noch günstiger und als Lizenz athlet bekommt mann sogar noch rabat. Im gegen teil zu Garmin was sehr sehr stolze Preise hat und dazu jetzt noch das überteuert Abo was sicher mehr ausgebaut wirt mit neuen Uhren das es dazu gekauft werden muss. Ob das die Leute wohlen oder nicht das wird kommen bei garmin das mann noch die ganze uhr nutzen kann.
I have always been curious about Polar. I have never owned one, maybe because of the DC reviews. Having said that I have used a good bit of Suunto and Coros products and some of the same reasons could be used. I think for me I was always confused why the Youtube influencers were getting amazing accuracy out of their Garmins while not so much out of a Suunto, Polar or a Coros. The DC Analyzer has set me straight on a lot of things including GPS, Power, Pace, and of course HR.
to expand on the above.
there are numerous medias site that have zero idea how to test hr properly. or if they know what to do they dont even attempt to do it.
DCR *DOES* test workout HR properly and the dcranalyzer (which i use now) is one of many for comparing multiple HR tracks but it **clearly shows visual agreements**. the problem with N=1 is that what can work for someone can also fail for someone else.
even comparing power numbers is not as obvious as it seems. My personal experience is that you have to tightly control the test conditions…who else does that in reality? (from a consumer perspective)
According to the reviews, the Polar Vantage M3 is a good Polar watch!
At least at the level of a Suunto Race S.
I had the Race S here for a few days:
– sleep tracking didn’t work. (Software bug with the last update?)
– the crown is much too stiff. That really annoyed me!
And that was also something that was unfortunately not mentioned in almost any review.
Next time I would take a look at the Polar M3.
But I hope that Polar will finally give their Polar app a fresh design. Just like their watch UI!
Polar should also add some functions that have been missing for a few years. But have long been requested by users!
I currently have an FR265.
perhaps the reviews were published when the bug wasnt introduced!
I have used Garmin for many years and I’m pretty deep into their ecosystem. Both for running and biking.
However, when it is time to upgrade any gear I will look for a non-US brand.
Same! I will try to avoid as many US brands as possible.
quite a few people are saying the same.
people really are speaking with their wallets…apparently tourism into the USA is down as well. interesting.
Polar no is making bike computers and is a great problem for cyclist . Mi m460 is old and no have alternative….
most runners don’t cycle.
but quite a lot do!
Polar needs to get smart about cycling. Suunto shared its app with Karoo which was a good idea.
I suppose Polar assumes you will dual-record your cyclign with its watches and another bike computer.
Pah runners….xD
Wahoo lacks a watch. Polar lacks a bike computer and sells access to Flow anyways.
But that cooperation won’t happen because Polar rather releases over priced averageness like the Grit X Pro 2 or the Polar Band everyone would love to buy but then won’t sell it or come up with a subscription right after got a small sh1tstorm for something similar.
They only just reclaimed a bit if goodwill with the M3 (that still could be 50€ cheaper and have less of the black band around the screen) and then come up with the subscritption modell.
It feels like Polar is run by an internet troll.
I used polar for years. Moved to Garmin and not regretted it. Garmin is so much better in more ways than I can list. Sure it has stuff I don’t need. Fine, I don’t use it. Garmin regularly receives updates. Polar never does. Garmin GPS is much better.
You forgot one key reason: Polar isn’t a US company.
That would definitely be the key factor justify the move for me, for the foreseeable future.
Or I’d move to suunto, or coros.
COROS’ main operations are within mainland China, Its majority investor is China-based YF Tech.
Its R&D and manufacturing are in its HQ in Dongguan, mainland China. The company’s other branches in North America and Netherlands B.V which serve the European Economic Area (EEA) are for marketing outside of mainland China.
Polar is a privately owned company based in Finland and appears to have funding from the EU: https://tracxn.com/d/companies/polar/__M92_PMwRXqg5mj8wDfDCfLMN9_Q0tCESbWXNiTZA4ZQ/funding-and-investors
google/tracxn suggests Polar also has funding from US invester Alpine, but I could not find Polar listed https://alpineinvestors.com/portfolio/
it can be very difficult to determine the ultimate owners of specific companies.