Video summary

Huawei Watch Fit 5 - SCIENTIFIC Review!

Main summary

Key takeaways

Product Review

Product

Huawei Watch Fit 5 (normal/non‑Pro) — compared directly against the Huawei Watch Fit 5 Pro using the same “scientific review” protocol. The reviewer also notes an upcoming deep dive on Huawei’s sleep staging update.

Main features highlighted

  • Display (positioning): The normal Fit 5 is slightly smaller/lighter.
    • Normal Fit 5: 1.82” AMOLED, up to 2,500 nits peak brightness (as stated by Huawei in the materials).
    • Pro: larger screen and higher brightness (no exact nit value provided in the subtitles).
  • Sports/health coverage: Lots of sports modes + health features, including NFC payments via Curve Pay in many European countries.
  • Sleep tech focus: Updated sleep monitoring approach / “True Sleep 5.0,” emphasizing a stable sleep metric.

Testing method / scoring system

The reviewer uses a 1–100 scoring system (same as the Pro video) across 3 areas:

  1. Heart rate tracking performance
  2. Sleep stage tracking performance
  3. GPS tracking performance

Heart rate score definition

  • Average correlation across running + indoor cycling + outdoor cycling
  • Multiplied by 100
  • Weightlifting excluded from the heart-rate score (considered unreliable/not a good wrist use-case in this context).

Key results (pros/cons and performance)

1) Heart rate tracking (very strong)

Indoor cycling (spinning)

  • Correlation R = 0.99 (“almost perfect”)
  • Tiny deviations; excellent agreement with Polar H10 ECG

Running

  • Correlation R = 0.96
  • Some deviation early in runs and slight shifts, but generally “good enough” and acceptable.

Outdoor biking (commutes)

  • Correlation R = 0.96
  • Noted issues:
    • “Straight lines” suggesting stable/flat readings or missed signal/export quirks
    • Minor drops in some segments

Weightlifting (hard use case)

  • Correlation R = 0.94
  • Reviewer says it misses peaks and sometimes detects heart rate too low
  • Some sessions show many “straight lines,” suspected signal/export loss
  • Conclusion: wrist HR on weightlifting is not reliably good; recommends an ECG chest strap
  • Competition opinion: only Apple watches and possibly Amazfit Helios strap worn on biceps are “good enough” for weightlifting; otherwise chest strap is best.

Overall heart rate score

  • Average correlation 0.97 → score 97
  • Pro also scored 97
  • Conclusion: Fit 5 and Fit 5 Pro have essentially the same heart-rate performance (Pro difference not meaningful for heart rate).

Comparisons made (heart rate)

  • Fit 5 is among the top/near-top performers in indoor cycling and outdoor biking
  • Comparable Huawei watches are described as essentially similar (e.g., Fit 4 / Fit 4 Pro / Watch GT series, GT Runner 2, etc.)
  • For biking outside, reviewer notes Pro did a tiny bit worse, attributed to randomness/limited testing.

2) Sleep stage tracking (weaker—especially REM)

Reference device

  • Z Max EEG headband (called a “silver standard”; not perfect, but scientific)

Huawei sleep approach

  • Updated algorithm and “stable sleep” metric under True Sleep 5.0

Agreement by stage (Fit 5 vs EEG)

  • Awake time ignored due to false awake detections from the reference
  • Results:
    • Deep sleep: ~80% agreement (good)
    • Light sleep: ~78% agreement (good)
    • REM sleep: only ~23% agreement (poor)

Example night

  • Deep sleep alignment looks reasonable
  • REM is largely missed; Fit 5 detects very little REM similar to what was seen on the Pro model

Comparison / ranking vs competition

  • Huawei improves average sensitivity, but REM weakness keeps it from top-tier performance
  • Reviewer suggests best devices currently include: Apple, Google (Pixel watches + Fitbit), Oura Ring, Whoop Strap, and Eight Sleep Pod (Eight Sleep Pod improves sleep but is not a wearable)

Important follow-up

  • Reviewer contacted Huawei; Huawei says the result is not consistent with their internal testing
  • Reviewer plans additional data collection with a second person (Rafael) to check REM behavior (only REM percentage mentioned for the second person)

Overall sleep score

  • Score uses average sensitivity across light + deep + REM
  • Normal Fit 5: 60/100 (“okay”)
  • Pro score: 60/100
  • Conclusion: Pro vs non‑Pro is indistinguishable for sleep staging in this test.

3) GPS tracking (good; Pro not meaningfully better)

Test method

  • Repeat the same cycling routes and overlay tracks to assess overlap/consistency
  • Also tested a route with and without wall obstruction

Cycling

  • Quick signal acquisition
  • Generally solid, with some deviation in certain segments and around a roundabout/walls
  • Described as not top-tier but clearly solid

Running

  • Left (less obstruction): near “almost perfect”
  • Right (wall obstruction): more deviation but still “very good”
  • Overlays suggest consistent patterns across runs

GPS score

  • Subjective 1–100 score (reviewer working toward more objective measures later)
  • Reviewer gives Fit 5 non‑Pro GPS score = 77
  • Pro reportedly received 77 as well
  • Conclusion: No meaningful difference between Pro and non‑Pro GPS.

Category result: “Good GPS tracking.”

Unique points mentioned about user experience / design

  • In daily use, the Fit 5 feels more minimal, while still being comfortable for bed
  • Minor aesthetic difference: bezels aren’t identical across screen edges between normal and Pro; it “bugs” the reviewer slightly when comparing models side-by-side

Pros (as stated/implicit)

  • Excellent heart rate tracking, especially indoor cycling (R=0.99)
  • Very good outdoor biking heart rate (R=0.96) and overall heart-rate score 97
  • Good GPS tracking with quick acquisition (77)
  • Comfortable wearable and sleep-friendly fit (reviewer says it’s comfortable to wear to bed)
  • Pro-to-normal differences are limited for real performance (heart rate/GPS/sleep score all similar)

Cons (as stated/implicit)

  • Sleep staging is notably weak for REM (~23% agreement)
  • Weightlifting heart-rate tracking is not reliable (misses peaks and sometimes under-detects; chest strap recommended)
  • GPS is not top-tier (some route segments show deviation, especially around obstructions)

Overall scores / summary of recommendation

Huawei Watch Fit 5 (normal)

  • Heart rate: 97/100 (Great)
  • Sleep: 60/100 (Okay)
  • GPS: 77/100 (Good)

Huawei Watch Fit 5 Pro

  • Heart rate: 97/100
  • Sleep: 60/100
  • GPS: 77/100
  • Overall: Pro performs “more or less identical” in these tested areas.

Verdict

  • If you care most about heart rate + GPS reliability, the non‑Pro Fit 5 is essentially as good as the Pro, making the normal model better value.
  • If sleep stage tracking (especially REM) is a priority, the reviewer does not consider either Fit 5 model great—both are only “okay,” with REM detection as the main weakness.
  • Spend extra on the Pro mainly for extras/better materials and better looks; measured performance is effectively the same.

Speaker breakdown

  • Single main speaker (Rob): handled all testing results, scoring methodology, comparisons, and conclusions. No other distinct speakers’ opinions were included in the subtitles.

Original video