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

1. Simpler & More Focused Features – essential training metrics without Garmin’s perceived “data bloat” (e.g., Body Battery, Endurance Score). OPINION. True.
2. 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.
3. 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-workout data screen is as good as those on any other sports watch.
4. 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, both have made improvements.
5. 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 & Synaptics) 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).
6. 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.
7. 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! With Polar, Stryd power integrates natively.
8. 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.
9. Lower Cost for Core Sports Features – OPINION: True, Polar has the core features and more.
10. 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 generally highly user-friendly.
11. 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.
12. 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.
13. 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 can’t measure power (work) in that setting.
14. 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

1. PacePro & Race Planning Tools – Garmin’s PacePro is highly valued for pacing races, especially by trail and road runners on hilly courses. OPINION: True
2. Music & Smart Features – Polar lacks streaming music support and contactless payments. OPINION: True. Although Polar sells a non biometrically authenticated payment strap.
3. 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. New generations of watches mean the older ones are discounted around launch times.

More: Buy a Polar here