
Amazfit price rises: are they getting too expensive?
Zepp Health has confirmed that average selling prices across the Amazfit portfolio rose more than 20 per cent year-over-year in Q1 2026. Consumers are paying the higher prices. For now, at least, the market appears willing to follow Amazfit upmarket.
I assumed the usual Amazfit pattern would reassert itself: launch high, discount quickly. So far, it has not, as all seven products launched in 2026 are holding at MSRP. Clearly, this is the new strategy:
| Product | Launch | Price (unchanged) |
|---|---|---|
| Active Max | January 2026 | $169.99 |
| Active 3 Premium | February 2026 | $169.99 |
| T-Rex Ultra 2 | February 2026 | $549.99 / £549.90 |
| Cheetah 2 Pro | April 2026 | $449.99 |
| Cheetah 2 Ultra | May 2026 | $599.99 / £599.90 |
| Bip Max | May 2026 | $99.99 |
| Balance 3 / Balance Ultra | June 2026 | $369.99-$599.99 |
Q: Could discounts be widespread in third-party channels?
A: No. Price comparison sites show only Amazfit’s own channels, including its Amazon Store, so there is no meaningful independent retail channel in the UK applying competitive pricing pressure. The periodic coupon codes and Prime Day bundles are shallow.
The Cheetah 2 Ultra, recently launched at £599.90, now sits alongside the Garmin Forerunner 970, which launched at £629.99 and is currently available at slightly lower retail levels (around £592 to £599). Garmin remains ahead in software, ecosystem depth, and training functionality. Battery life still goes the other way in Amazfit’s favour, but price no longer does. The brand is no longer asking buyers to take a chance on a cheaper alternative. It is asking them to choose Amazfit.
The Polar and Coros trap
Amazfit is falling into the same trap that Polar fell into a decade ago, and that Coros is currently walking into with its eyes open. The difficulty is that premium watch buyers rarely make a purchase based on a specification sheet. The Cheetah 2 Ultra’s titanium and sapphire are real and valuable product characteristics. But Garmin’s advantage is its brand. At one end, that means genuine trust and perceived quality. At the other, it simply means the watch a friend mentions when asked.
The strategic problem
The pincer movement on Garmin that this site has argued for requires Chinese brands to compress from below, while Apple compresses from above. Amazfit moving upmarket and away from the discounted zone blunts the lower jaw of that pincer, leaving the entry levels open for the next challenger.
As Michael Porter wrote in Competitive Strategy (1980, p.41): “The firm stuck in the middle is almost guaranteed low profitability.” He restated it on the same page: “A firm stuck in the middle is in an extremely poor strategic situation.” Porter’s generic strategies framework makes the survival logic plain: defensible positions are either high volume and low cost, or low volume and high margin. Garmin does not occupy the low-cost end. Amazfit is vacating it.
Huawei is the wildcard. Smartphone-scale distribution in China and a device that shares truly smart features give it a platform neither Garmin nor Amazfit can match, though its reach outside China remains limited. The full picture of Amazfit 2026 product launches is covered separately.
Frequently Asked Questions
Has Amazfit discounted any of its 2026 watches?
Not as of June 2026. All seven products launched this year are holding at MSRP. Periodic coupon codes exist but are shallow and short-lived.
Why are Amazfit’s prices rising?
Zepp Health confirmed that average selling prices rose more than 20 per cent year-over-year in Q1 2026, driven by a deliberate shift toward premium materials, including titanium and sapphire glass, across the range.
Is Amazfit a good value compared to Garmin at the same price?
On materials, yes. On features, software depth, and ecosystem maturity, no.
What is Porter’s “stuck in the middle” theory?
Michael Porter argued in Competitive Strategy (1980) that firms which fail to commit to either cost leadership or differentiation end up in an indefensible middle ground. He called this being “stuck in the middle” and described it as almost guaranteeing low profitability.
Last Updated on 9 June 2026 by the5krunner

tfk is the founder and author of the5krunner, an independent endurance sports technology publication. With 20 years of hands-on testing of GPS watches and wearables, and competing in triathlons at an international age-group level, tfk provides in-depth expert analysis of fitness technology for serious athletes and endurance sport competitors. ID

The price difference in GBP is very small. Here in Czechia we have something about 40 EUR when Forerunner 970 is on sale. The official price is about 780 EUR compared to about 620 EUR price of Cheetah 2 Ultra (and Balance Ultra as well probably). Which is quite interesting given official price of Forerunner 970 on german site is 670 EUR and of Balance Ultra/Cheetah 2 Ultra also on german site is 600 EUR.
Because Cheetah 2 Ultra and Balance Ultra are using a lot of titanium, I think the price is ok. They have delivered high-quality watches from a material standpoint. If they would have released a Cheetah 2 Ultra stainless steel version, it would be probably match the Balance 3 stainless steel pricing of $/€ 369- which is a very good price for the delivered hardware. I have no problems with the Amazfit pricing. The Bip Max has a really good pricing for the offered hw and sw, so is the Active Max and…. But others may see this different…
TI – agreed, that’s part of the argument. for those who notice and value materials it is important. you are the minority!
They shouldn’t grumble or whine; they should just buy a cheaper model instead. No one is forced to buy a specific model. Yet, many people always want the latest thing. Higher quality comes at a price, after all—and that’s not just the case with Amazfit.