Pixel Watch 2 vs Fitbit Sense 2 vs Amazfit Balance: Ultimate 2025 Smartwatch Showdown

by Marcin Frąckiewicz
in Smartwatches, Technology Reviews, Wearable Tech
on 19 August 2025

Smartwatches have evolved into powerful companions for fitness, health, and everyday convenience. Google’s Pixel Watch 2, Fitbit’s Sense 2, and Amazfit’s Balance are three popular options for health-conscious users in 2025. Each promises robust fitness tracking, health monitoring, and smart features – but how do they truly compare? In this comprehensive report, we’ll compare their strengths and weaknesses in fitness tracking, health monitoring, battery endurance, design, software ecosystem, smart features, pricing, and overall user experience. We’ll also peek at upcoming models and competitors shaping the next generation of smartwatches.

(Citations for factual claims and expert quotes are provided throughout, so you can see what the experts have to say about these devices.)

Fitness Tracking Capabilities

Google Pixel Watch 2: The Pixel Watch 2 benefits from Google’s integration of Fitbit’s fitness platform. It can track a wide variety of workouts using Fitbit’s algorithms, delivering reliable metrics like heart rate zones, GPS-tracked distance, and Active Zone Minutes. Reviewers note the Pixel Watch 2 made “big strides” in fitness features over the first-gen model, including better stress tracking and health monitoring. However, when it comes to hardcore exercise analytics, the Pixel Watch 2 still isn’t the top of the class. “It has Wear OS 4, a new chip and better apps – but still lags behind rivals on workouts,” observes The Guardian. In practice, it’s great for general fitness and daily activity goals, but more specialized sport watches (and even Amazfit or Garmin devices) offer deeper training stats. For most casual to intermediate users, the Pixel Watch 2 provides all the essential fitness tracking features, backed by Fitbit’s well-regarded accuracy and coaching insights.

Fitbit Sense 2: As Fitbit’s flagship smartwatch (at least before Google’s Pixel takeover), the Sense 2 is squarely focused on fitness and wellness tracking. It supports automatic exercise detection and 40+ workout modes, from running and cycling to yoga. A standout feature is its continuous EDA (electrodermal activity) sensor for stress monitoring – Fitbit was a pioneer in stress tracking, and the Sense 2 builds on that legacy with all-day stress measurement. Fitbit’s platform also shines in casual fitness tracking: step counting, calorie burn estimates, and especially sleep tracking are highly praised. In fact, TechRadar calls the Sense 2 “an enjoyable-to-use casual health and fitness tracker that demands less upkeep than an Apple Watch”, though they caution that Fitbit’s new closed software approach makes it “less flexible” than before. The Sense 2’s heart rate accuracy is decent for everyday use, but reviewers noted it “is not top-tier” for intense training or very high heart rate intervals. Overall, for users who want a low-maintenance fitness tracker that you can wear and forget for days (while it quietly logs your activity, stress, and sleep), the Sense 2 is a strong contender.

Amazfit Balance: The Amazfit Balance takes a slightly different approach – it attempts to offer everything including an expansive list of 150+ sport modes, advanced metrics, and even niche features like body composition analysis. Powered by Amazfit’s in-house BioTracker 5.0 PPG optical sensor and dual-band GPS, the Balance can record runs, hikes, swims, strength training, and more with surprising accuracy tech4all.net. Third-party testers found that “sports tracking is exceptional… It can track over 100 sports, and the results are very accurate”, thanks in part to its precise GPS and improved sensors. The Balance also provides training load and recovery data similar to higher-end fitness watches, plus an AI-powered coach (though some of those AI features were described as gimmicky or buggy in practice wired.com). Unlike the Pixel or Fitbit, Amazfit even includes a Body Composition feature using a built-in BIA sensor – you can grasp the watch to get an estimate of your body fat percentage. One reviewer called this Body Comp feature “interesting,” noting it reported plausible body fat readings (though not medically precise). In short, the Amazfit Balance is packed with fitness functions that will please enthusiasts – from triathletes who want accurate GPS tracking to gym-goers curious about body fat – but its breadth of features comes with a learning curve and occasional software quirks.

Health Monitoring and Wellness Features

All three watches double as 24/7 health monitors, tracking vital signs and wellness metrics beyond just workouts. Here’s how they compare:

Heart Rate and Cardio: Continuous heart-rate monitoring is table stakes, and all three deliver. The Pixel Watch 2 earned praise for “reliable activity and heart rate tracking” wired.com thanks to an upgraded multi-path sensor (inherited from Fitbit’s tech). The Fitbit Sense 2 likewise offers all-day heart-rate tracking, heart rate variability (HRV) insights, and high/low heart rate alerts. Fitbit has years of experience refining heart-rate accuracy for both exercise and resting states, though one review noted the Sense 2’s “heart rate reliability is not top-tier” under all conditions. The Amazfit Balance uses its BioTracker 5.0 sensor for continuous heart monitoring and can record your resting heart rate trends, workout heart rate zones, and even spot-check blood-oxygen (SpO₂) levels. Reviewers found the Balance’s HR readings generally on par with more expensive devices, though perhaps a notch below the medical-grade accuracy of something like an Apple Watch or dedicated chest strap.
ECG and Heart Health: Both the Pixel Watch 2 and Fitbit Sense 2 include an ECG (electrocardiogram) app to assess heart rhythm and potentially detect atrial fibrillation. This is a notable advantage for those concerned with heart health. With a simple on-wrist test, they can produce a single-lead ECG reading. The Sense 2 and Pixel Watch 2 essentially match each other here – Fitbit pioneered ECG on wearables and Google carried it over to the Pixel Watch line tomsguide.com. In contrast, the Amazfit Balance does not have ECG capability, focusing instead on other metrics. If ECG and FDA-cleared heart rhythm monitoring are priorities, Pixel 2 or Sense 2 have the edge.
Stress and Mental Wellness: One of Fitbit’s signature metrics is stress monitoring via EDA sensors, and both the Pixel Watch 2 and Sense 2 pack this technology. The Sense 2 was actually the first to implement continuous EDA (cEDA) scanning throughout the day to quantify your stress responses. Fitbit’s app can log your “Stress Management Score” using EDA, heart rate, and sleep data. The Pixel Watch 2, leveraging the same sensor, also offers all-day stress tracking and was lauded for “better health and stress tracking” than its predecessor. These watches can prompt you to do breathing exercises if stress levels spike. Amazfit Balance, while lacking EDA, estimates stress via heart-rate variability and includes guided breathing and meditation features. However, some of its fancier wellness tools (like “Zen” mindfulness coaching or AI sleep advisors) were found to be “unhelpful” or not fully polished in early reviews wired.com. Still, all three devices recognize that wellness is more than steps – they track stress and encourage relaxation, with Fitbit/Pixel’s approach being more science-backed and validated.
Sleep Tracking: Fitbit has long been considered one of the best for sleep tracking, and that carries over in the Sense 2 (and by extension, Pixel Watch 2 which uses Fitbit sleep analytics). They automatically detect sleep stages (light, deep, REM), provide a Sleep Score each morning, and even track skin temperature changes overnight. Users appreciate the depth of Fitbit’s sleep insights, which often outshine Apple’s simpler sleep metrics. The Pixel Watch 2 can also leverage this data for a “Sleep Profile” feature if you subscribe to Fitbit Premium, analyzing your sleep patterns over a month. The Amazfit Balance also puts in a strong showing – it monitors sleep stages, breathing quality, and offers a sleep score as well. A Wired review noted the Balance’s sleep and workout tracking were “mostly accurate”, marking a big improvement for Amazfit’s platform. In practice, all three will give you useful feedback on your nightly rest, but Fitbit’s software (used by Sense 2 and Pixel 2) provides the most actionable guidance.
Other Health Sensors: The Pixel Watch 2 and Sense 2 are loaded with sensors: both have SpO₂ sensors for blood oxygen saturation, which can help flag breathing issues (though not intended for medical use) and track altitude acclimation. They also each have a skin temperature sensor – used to detect variations at night or during menstrual cycle tracking. The Sense 2 can even chart your nightly skin temperature variation in the Fitbit app. Pixel Watch 2 uses its temperature sensor for similar wellness insights (e.g. detecting fevers or cycle changes), though neither device provides on-demand temperature readings. The Amazfit Balance includes a temperature sensor as well (user reports suggest it measures ambient and skin temperature), adding to its holistic approach. Uniquely, the Balance’s Bio-Impedance sensor can measure body composition (body fat %, muscle mass estimate). Neither Google nor Fitbit offer body composition in these models – that’s a feature typically found on Samsung’s Galaxy Watch or dedicated scales, making Amazfit’s inclusion notable. As one review described, the Balance can tell you if you’re a “normal, healthy” person in terms of body fat, albeit in a rough estimation. It’s an interesting extra for those pursuing fitness goals.
Alerts and Overall Wellness: All three watches support high/low heart rate alerts and irregular heart rhythm notifications (Pixel and Sense use their ECG hardware for Afib alerts; Amazfit uses heart-rate variability cues to warn of anomalies). The Pixel Watch 2 also introduced a Safety Check feature that can share your status with contacts or auto-dial emergency if you don’t respond – useful for personal safety when out alone. Reviewers called Safety Check “a great emergency feature” on the Pixel. Fitbit devices offer an ECG-based Afib alert program and will soon integrate with Google’s new irregular heart rhythm notifications as well. Amazfit’s app can likewise alert you if it detects an abnormally high or low heart rate at rest. All these devices emphasize preventative wellness: encouraging you to stay active, manage stress, and be aware of any warning signs in your vital stats.

In summary, Pixel Watch 2 and Fitbit Sense 2 are the most feature-rich in medical-style health monitoring (with ECG, EDA, etc.), essentially matching each other’s sensor set. The Pixel Watch 2 arguably ties everything together with the tightest integration (Google’s Fitbit ecosystem plus Pixel-exclusive safety features). Fitbit Sense 2 offers nearly the same health benefits at a lower price, making advanced wellness tracking more accessible. Amazfit Balance casts a wide net with innovative extras like body composition and does a commendable job on core health metrics, but its wellness software isn’t as mature or clinically vetted. For someone serious about health metrics and willing to pay for premium features (and possibly a subscription for deeper insights), Pixel Watch 2 or Sense 2 will inspire more confidence. For someone who wants lots of health data without breaking the bank – and doesn’t mind sorting through it – the Balance provides a ton of information and long-term trend tracking.

Battery Life

Battery life is a make-or-break factor for many smartwatch buyers, and in this category the three devices differ dramatically. Here’s the rundown:

Google Pixel Watch 2: The original Pixel Watch notoriously barely lasted a day, but Google addressed this in generation 2. Thanks to a more efficient processor and software optimizations in Wear OS 4, the Pixel Watch 2 now comfortably achieves all-day battery life – and then some. In real-world use, reviewers report about 36–38 hours on a charge, including overnight sleep tracking. This means you can wear it all day, track your sleep, and still have a bit of juice by next morning. It’s a huge improvement over the prior model. “Battery actually lasts all day,” The Verge noted gratefully in its list of positives. However, compared to the multi-day endurance of some competitors, the Pixel Watch 2 is still a one-day watch for most folks. If you enable the always-on display or do GPS workouts, you’ll likely be charging nightly or every 24 hours. The upside is the Pixel Watch 2 charges much faster now – about 50% in 30 minutes – so a quick top-up can give hours of use. Bottom line: one full day per charge is what to expect from Pixel Watch 2. It’s acceptable for a powerful smartwatch, but falls well short of the marathon battery life of Fitbit or Amazfit.
Fitbit Sense 2: Battery longevity is where the Sense 2 truly shines. Fitbit advertises about 6 days of battery life on a single charge, and many users find they get close to a full week before reaching for the charger. This means the Sense 2 can outlast an Apple Watch or Pixel Watch by several days, making it far more convenient for 24/7 wear and sleep tracking. You don’t have to worry about charging every night; even with intensive use (multiple workouts, SpO₂ tracking at night, etc.), the Sense 2 often manages 4–5 days. This long battery life aligns with the Sense 2’s identity as a more streamlined, low-power device (it doesn’t run power-hungry third-party apps or cellular radios that drain battery). Reviewers consistently list battery life as a top pro – TechRadar simply calls it “Good battery life” and Tom’s Guide praises the “great battery life” that lets you wear it for days on end. In practical terms, many Sense 2 users just charge it once or twice a week, perhaps while showering or sitting at a desk, and otherwise never worry about it. If multi-day endurance is a priority, the Sense 2 is a clear winner among these three.
Amazfit Balance: The Balance utterly dwarfs the other two when it comes to battery endurance. Amazfit claims up to 14 days (two weeks) of typical use on a charge wired.com, thanks to a large 475 mAh battery and an efficient Zepp OS. Real-world usage backs this up: one reviewer noted “the battery life theoretically lasts 14 days… with a few tracked activities per day, I did have to charge it once in the past two weeks” wired.com. In other words, roughly 10–14 days of usage per charge is realistic, depending on how heavily you use features like GPS. Even with everything turned on – continuous health tracking, lots of notifications, and the always-on display active – the Balance can last around 5–6 days tech4all.net, which is still on par with or better than the Sense 2’s best case. This kind of longevity is a game-changer if you hate charging devices. You can go on a week-long trip without even packing the charger. The trade-off is that the Balance’s charger is a proprietary magnetic cable (not as convenient as universal wireless chargers), but needing it only twice a month softens that drawback. It’s worth noting that battery life can drop if you do lengthy GPS workouts daily (continuous GPS is a battery hog on any watch), but even then the Balance will outlast Pixel and Fitbit by multiples. In summary, Amazfit Balance is the runaway champion of battery life here – truly in a different league. For someone valuing ultra-long battery above all, it’s an obvious choice.

To put it succinctly: Pixel Watch 2 = about 1.5 days per charge; Fitbit Sense 2 = around 6 days; Amazfit Balance = roughly 10–14 days wired.com. The differences are stark. That said, battery life is closely tied to features – the Pixel Watch 2’s shorter life is the price of its smartphone-like capabilities, whereas the Balance’s longevity comes partly from its leaner OS. It’s up to the user whether the convenience of not charging often outweighs the benefits of a more powerful platform.

Design and Build Quality

Each of these smartwatches has a distinct design philosophy and build, affecting comfort and style:

Google Pixel Watch 2: Google’s watch is known for its elegant, minimalist design that sets it apart from the typical techy look of many wearables. It has a round 41mm case with a striking “smooth pebble” profile – a domed Gorilla Glass front that curves seamlessly into the metal body. Many reviewers love this aesthetic; Wired went as far as calling the Pixel Watch “the most elegant smartwatch to date” thanks to that sleek domed-glass design. The Pixel Watch 2 looks virtually identical to the first gen, except that Google switched from stainless steel to a recycled aluminum case. This makes the Watch 2 about 10% lighter (just 31g without band), improving comfort for all-day wear. The aluminum has a matte finish and comes in multiple colors (black, silver, gold tones). While lighter, aluminum is a bit less premium-feeling (and potentially less durable) than steel – one reviewer noted they “would’ve preferred the durability of stainless steel” especially at this price. The watch is still sturdy and water-resistant (5 ATM + IP68), but not user-repairable; both the Pixel Watch 2 and its predecessor are essentially sealed units that can’t be easily fixed if the screen cracks or battery degrades. In fact, durability is a mixed bag: the domed glass gives it a premium jewelry-like look, but it also means a lot of exposed glass. Some reviewers have accidentally cracked their Pixel Watch screens in drops, so a protective case or care is advisable. The Pixel Watch 2 comes in only one size (41mm) – great for those with smaller wrists, but it “looks a bit out of place on larger people,” as The Guardian’s editor observed. The included band is a soft silicone strap that’s comfortable and uses a proprietary quick-release mechanism for swapping (Google offers several band styles, albeit at high prices). Overall, the Pixel Watch 2’s design screams “sleek and stylish,” and it’s extremely comfortable for 24/7 wear wired.com, but the limited size and emphasis on form over repairability are points to consider.
Fitbit Sense 2: The Sense 2 takes a design approach closer to a classic smartwatch/fitness watch hybrid. It has a squarish shape with rounded corners – essentially a rounded square or “squircle” – reminiscent of the Apple Watch’s silhouette. The case is about 40mm across and very slim (12mm thick, lighter than it looks). Fitbit gave the Sense 2 a “fresher design” than the original Sense, refining the look and feel. The body uses aluminum alloy for lightness, with a polished finish, and the screen is a 1.58-inch AMOLED covered by Gorilla Glass. Importantly, Fitbit listened to user feedback and reintroduced a physical button on the Sense 2. The first Sense had a touch-sensitive haptic groove that many found finicky; the Sense 2’s clickable side button is more reliable for controls (especially with sweaty hands or gloves on). Users report the Sense 2 is extremely comfortable for long-term wear – it weighs only ~37g and the default soft silicone band is gentle on the skin. “Comfortable to wear for long periods,” notes Tom’s Guide, which is crucial since Fitbit encourages wearing it day and night for holistic tracking. The watch is water-resistant to 50m as well, safe for swimming. In terms of looks, the Sense 2 is often described as understated – not flashy, but clean and modern. It comes in neutral colors (graphite, platinum, gold aluminum options with different band colors). Because it’s thin and the bezels around the screen are moderately sized, it doesn’t look as “jewelry-like” as the Pixel, but it also doesn’t look bulky on slender wrists. The build quality is solid, and since it’s not a full-featured app watch, there are fewer points of failure (no speaker holes on the original design – though a speaker exists, it’s discreet). Unlike the Pixel, the Sense 2’s screen is flat, which some users prefer for applying screen protectors or avoiding edge impacts. All in all, the Sense 2’s design prioritizes ergonomics and simplicity. It may not turn heads like a Pixel Watch, but it’s a watch you can forget you’re wearing – “comfortable, with a fairly easy-to-understand interface,” as TechRadar put it.
Amazfit Balance: Amazfit’s design language for the Balance aims to blend the sporty look of a fitness watch with the premium touches of a smartwatch. The Balance features a round 46mm case – notably larger than Pixel or Fitbit – but thanks to clever design it doesn’t feel like a dinner plate on the wrist. “Despite having such a big case…it didn’t feel large or obtrusive on my wrist,” noted Wired’s reviewer with a smaller wrist. The case uses a sleek grey aluminum bezel (or black, depending on model) and a fiber-reinforced polymer back, keeping weight low (about 35g without strap). A tempered glass covers the 1.5-inch AMOLED display (480×480 resolution, with fairly thin bezels) tech4all.net tech4all.net. Overall, the Balance was praised as “a beautiful smartwatch…sleek design…stunning, slim, lightweight body” tech4all.net. It actually resembles the Samsung Galaxy Watch’s style – one reviewer mentioned a coworker mistook it for a Galaxy Watch6, which was taken as “high praise” for the Amazfit’s looks. The Balance has two physical buttons on the side (one is a rotating crown), which are tactile and can be customized (e.g. double-click to launch a specific app) tech4all.net tech4all.net. This gives it a traditional watch flair and easy navigation, complementing the touchscreen. The device is 5 ATM water-resistant, suitable for swimming (Wired humorously noted you can swim with it, “if not while taking a shower, weirdly”, an odd quirk of Amazfit’s documentation) wired.com. For straps, Amazfit offers both a sporty silicone strap and a breathable nylon option – the latter was called “my favorite, most comfortable nylon strap” by one reviewer. The standard 22mm quick-release lugs mean you can swap in third-party bands easily, a nice flexibility (Pixel and Fitbit use proprietary band systems). In terms of durability, the Balance feels well-made, though its software issues (discussed later) somewhat cloud the user experience. A potential concern is the lack of any stated screen protection like Gorilla Glass – it’s “tempered glass,” which should resist scratches but may not be as tough as Sapphire or Gorilla on impact. However, none of the reviews signaled major build quality problems; on the contrary, the Amazfit’s hardware was widely praised. “Great hardware… and the Balance doesn’t need saving” by software, writes Android Police, noting its premium materials, bright display, and robust build that “includes a battery that regularly lasts longer than any Wear OS watch”. In sum, the Amazfit Balance looks and feels like a high-end sport smartwatch – large but sleek, lightweight for its size, and comfortable due to thoughtful design.

When it comes to design, personal taste will play a big role. The Pixel Watch 2 is the choice for those who value style and a compact form – it’s chic and unobtrusive, almost like a fashion watch, but ensure its small size suits you. The Fitbit Sense 2 is all about comfort and subtlety – a slim, no-nonsense design that won’t stand out, but won’t get in your way either. The Amazfit Balance caters to those who don’t mind a larger watch – it makes use of that size for a big display and battery, yet manages to remain sleek and attractive, especially if you prefer a round watch aesthetic. All three have quality builds (aluminum cases, water resistance), but only the Pixel uses premium glass (its durability vs. the Amazfit’s tempered glass is untested). If repairability matters, none of these is easily repairable by users, but Google’s watch notably cannot have its battery or screen replaced except by full device replacement. Fitbit and Amazfit also don’t advertise any repair programs for their watches. So treat them kindly!

Operating System and App Ecosystem

One of the biggest differentiators among these three wearables is the software they run and the app ecosystems (or lack thereof) they support. Here’s how they stack up:

Pixel Watch 2 – Wear OS 4 (Google’s ecosystem): The Pixel Watch 2 is essentially a full-fledged smartwatch running Google’s Wear OS platform. This means it can run a wide array of third-party apps available through the Google Play Store on your wrist. Out of the box, it comes with Google’s own apps optimized for wearables – Maps for turn-by-turn navigation, Google Wallet for contactless payments, Gmail and Calendar (new in Wear OS 4) for staying on top of emails and events, Google Assistant for voice control, YouTube Music for tunes, and so on. Critically, any Wear OS-compatible app can be installed – whether it’s Spotify, Strava, WhatsApp, Uber, or various fitness apps. In fact, the Pixel Watch 2 recently gained a fully standalone WhatsApp app, allowing you to send and receive messages from your wrist (even Apple Watch doesn’t have a full WhatsApp client). This highlights the strength of Wear OS’s ecosystem: if you want apps and versatility, the Pixel Watch is in the same league as the Apple Watch, far ahead of Fitbit or Amazfit. The Pixel Watch 2 runs Wear OS 4, which brought improvements like better backup and restore (you can switch phones without resetting the watch, a long-awaited feature) wired.com, enhanced notifications with smart replies, and overall smoother performance. It’s powered by the Snapdragon W5+ Gen 1 processor and 2GB RAM, which reviewers say makes the interface “snappier” and free of the lag that older Wear OS watches had. The downside to all this capability is complexity and some platform limitations: the Pixel Watch 2 only works with Android phones. Unlike Fitbit or Amazfit, you cannot use it at all with an iPhone (Wear OS dropped iOS support in recent versions). So, Pixel Watch is strictly for Android users – but for them, it offers tight integration with Google services and Android features. You can respond to texts directly, control smart home devices via Assistant, use Google Pay, and enjoy a growing catalog of watch apps. Google has promised at least 3 years of software updates for Wear OS on the Pixel 2. Overall, if you want a robust app ecosystem and advanced smartwatch functions, Pixel Watch 2 delivers – it’s basically an Android micro-smartphone on the wrist, with all the pros and cons that entails (power, flexibility, but also higher battery drain and the need for more frequent updates).
Fitbit Sense 2 – Fitbit OS (closed ecosystem): The Sense 2 runs Fitbit’s proprietary operating system, which is much more limited in terms of third-party apps. In fact, Fitbit (under Google’s ownership) made a controversial decision with the Sense 2: they removed all support for third-party apps and watch faces that the original Sense/Versa models had. “Third-party app support has been removed…you could argue this is no longer a real smartwatch,” lamented TechRadar. That means you can’t install Spotify, you can’t add Strava or other apps – you’re basically limited to the built-in functions that Fitbit provides. What the Sense 2 does offer are a few Google integrations to sweeten the pot: it has Google Maps and Google Wallet available natively, which is new to Fitbit watches, allowing navigation and NFC payments from the wrist. These come in addition to Fitbit’s own standard apps like Exercise, Alarms, Timers, Weather, and the Alexa voice assistant. There’s no official Google Assistant support on the Sense 2 (somewhat puzzling given Google owns Fitbit) – “it’s an odd decision not to include Google Assistant as an option,” one reviewer noted. Fitbit likely didn’t want to overlap too much with the Pixel Watch. As a result, voice control on the Sense 2 is limited to Amazon Alexa, which works for things like weather queries, setting reminders, or controlling smart home devices via Alexa skills. In daily use, the Sense 2’s software is simple and stable. The interface got a slight redesign influenced by Wear OS styling (e.g. notification swipes, etc.), and it runs smoothly on modest hardware. What you lose in flexibility, you gain in ease of use and battery life – with no heavy apps running, the watch can focus on fitness tracking. However, advanced smartwatch users may feel restricted. There’s no music storage or playback on the Sense 2 (even the ability to control phone music is hit-or-miss) – “the Sense 2 loses any form of music support — no playback, no control”, which underscores the device’s focus on wellness over entertainment. The Sense 2 works with both Android and iOS, which is a big plus for versatility. On Android, you can respond to notifications with quick replies or voice replies (via Alexa text dictation) for certain apps. On iOS, like all Fitbits, you can receive notifications but cannot reply. In summary, the Fitbit Sense 2’s operating system is closed but very user-friendly. It’s perfect if you want a watch that just does fitness/health tracking and basic smart features without any fuss. But if you envision downloading various apps or games or custom utilities – Sense 2 will disappoint, as it’s more of a polished fitness tracker in smartwatch clothing.
Amazfit Balance – Zepp OS (lightweight ecosystem): Amazfit uses its own platform called Zepp OS. It’s somewhat in between Fitbit’s and Google’s approach. Zepp OS is lightweight and optimized for efficiency (hence the great battery life), but it does allow some third-party content in the form of mini apps and watch faces. The Amazfit Balance comes with a suite of built-in apps: fitness tracking, health dashboards, weather, alarms, compass, barometer, etc., and also supports Amazon Alexa for voice commands amazon.com manuals.plus. Through the companion Zepp app on your phone, you can install additional watch faces (Amazfit has a large community creating watch faces) and a handful of small apps/tools. These are nowhere near the scale of Wear OS or Apple’s App Store; they’re mostly niche or utility apps often made by enthusiasts. For example, there is a GoPro camera remote app available, and some simple games or utilities. A reviewer noted that “the apps on the [Zepp] App Store are not as good as Google Play or Apple’s, but you get some good options like the GoPro Remote”. So while you can extend the Balance’s functionality a bit, think of it as a bonus rather than a core strength. The Zepp OS interface on the watch is quite customizable and smooth – one tech review praised that “the interface is friendly, rich, fluid and comes with a lot of functions and customizations”. You can reorder menus, choose from lots of data widgets, and sync data with popular services like Strava or Google Fit. The Balance also has Zepp Coach (an AI fitness coach) and Zepp Aura (for mindfulness) integrations, but these often require a subscription or were not fully useful according to testers. A downside noted by Wired was that some features had to be manually enabled via the phone app and sometimes “did not work” reliably – for instance, setting up notifications and calls required extra steps. Speaking of which, the Balance can receive notifications from your phone and even answer calls via Bluetooth with its built-in mic and speaker. But the experience might not be as seamless: you can’t respond to texts with full keyboards or dictation (beyond some preset quick replies), and as one reviewer experienced, the call/text setup can be glitchy. Still, the basics are covered: you’ll get your WhatsApp or SMS alerts, call alerts, etc., and Alexa on wrist adds some smarts. One unique aspect of Zepp OS is offline voice commands – the Balance has a feature called “Zepp Flow” (in select regions) which acts as an offline voice assistant for certain actions (so you could control the watch with voice even without internet, using pre-set commands) us.amazfit.com. It’s niche, but an interesting inclusion for power users. Overall, Amazfit’s ecosystem is the most “open” of the closed systems, but it’s not in the same league as Wear OS. You won’t find mainstream apps, but you might find a creative workaround for some needs. Crucially, like Fitbit, Amazfit’s Zepp app works on both Android and iOS, giving you flexibility in phone choice. The watch can sync data (steps, sleep, etc.) with Apple Health or Google Fit if you want to integrate into broader health platforms.

In summary, if you want the richest app ecosystem and true smartwatch functionality, the Pixel Watch 2 is the clear choice – it’s basically Android on your wrist, with all the app diversity that comes with it. The trade-off is shorter battery life and Android-only compatibility. The Fitbit Sense 2 offers simplicity and stability – it’s almost appliance-like in doing a set range of tasks extremely well, but nothing more (no app expansions, no music, no fancy extras). That simplicity rewards you with fewer distractions and a week-long battery, and it works with any smartphone. The Amazfit Balance tries to give a bit of both worlds: some app choices and voice assistant versatility, while still maintaining a lean profile for long battery life. It succeeds in many ways (its UI and customization are well-liked), but also has the occasional quirk or setup hassle that reminds you it’s not as polished or integrated as Google or Apple’s ecosystems. Power users might enjoy fiddling with Zepp OS’s options, whereas casual users might prefer Fitbit’s no-fuss approach.

Smart Features: Notifications, Calls, and Voice Assistants

Beyond fitness and health, these devices serve as extensions of your smartphone (to varying degrees). Here’s how they handle typical “smartwatch” tasks like notifications, calls, and voice interactions:

Notifications: All three watches can receive call, text, and app notifications from your phone. The Pixel Watch 2, with its deep Android integration, excels here. Notifications are actionable – you can reply to messages using voice dictation, on-screen keyboard, or smart replies, and interact with notifications (archive an email, like a message, etc.) when apps support it. Thanks to Wear OS, notifications on Pixel Watch feel like an extension of Android’s system. You even get rich notifications with images or the ability to directly respond from apps like WhatsApp or Telegram on the watch. The Fitbit Sense 2 also delivers notifications reliably for calls, texts, and apps, but interactivity depends on your phone OS. Paired with an Android phone, the Sense 2 allows quick replies or emoji responses to texts and messages (with predefined replies you set in the Fitbit app). If paired with an iPhone, notifications are read-only – you can see them, but you cannot respond from the watch (that’s an Apple limitation for third-party wearables). Fitbit’s notifications are basic banners without much formatting, but they get the job done. The Amazfit Balance similarly pushes through phone notifications for essentially any app you allow via the Zepp companion app. You’ll see incoming caller ID, texts, and app alerts on the watch. You can’t type out replies on the Balance (no keyboard), but you can answer or reject calls (more on calls below), and for some messaging apps, you might set quick replies or use Alexa to send a short reply. One caveat: as mentioned earlier, some users had to tinker with Android settings to ensure the Amazfit’s notifications and call alerts work consistently. Once configured, they work, but it’s not as plug-and-play as Pixel or Fitbit. Overall, Pixel offers the richest notification experience, Fitbit offers the most hassle-free experience, and Amazfit is functional but may require tweaks.
Calls: Only watches with a speaker and microphone can handle phone calls from the wrist. The Pixel Watch 2 has both, and if you have the LTE model (and a carrier plan), it can even make/receive calls standalone without your phone nearby. On the Bluetooth model, it will route calls from your phone (acting as a Bluetooth speakerphone). Pixel Watch’s calling is straightforward and integrates with your contacts and Google Assistant (you can ask Assistant to call someone). The call quality is decent for quick chats, though holding your wrist up for long calls isn’t ideal. The Fitbit Sense 2 also features a mic and speaker, and after a software update post-launch, it now supports Bluetooth on-wrist calls when connected to your phone. This means you can answer a call on the Sense 2 and talk into your wrist Dick Tracy–style. It uses Bluetooth, so you need your phone in range. Many Sense 2 users were happy to see this enabled, as it was a missing feature at launch. The watch doesn’t have its own cellular capability (no Versa/Sense model has LTE), so it can’t operate independently for calls. The Amazfit Balance includes a microphone and a surprisingly loud speaker. It supports Bluetooth phone calls as well; you can answer calls on the watch if your phone is nearby, using the watch as a speakerphone. In theory, this works similarly to Fitbit’s implementation. However, as Wired’s review encountered, setting this up via the Zepp app could be finicky. Assuming it’s set correctly, you’d be able to take a quick call while your phone stays in your pocket or across the room. It’s great for short conversations or when your hands are busy. Keep in mind, none of these watches is particularly excellent for long calls – the speakers are small and can sound tinny, and privacy could be an issue since you’re effectively on speakerphone. But for brief uses (ask someone to call you back, quick status update, etc.), they all can work. The Pixel Watch (LTE) is unique in that it can make emergency calls or regular calls even if your phone is off, as long as it has cellular signal (this could be a lifesaver in some scenarios).
Voice Assistants: Voice commands offer a convenient way to interact with your watch hands-free. Each device here supports at least one voice assistant:
- The Pixel Watch 2 uses Google Assistant, which is built-in and readily accessible (you can launch it with “Hey Google” or via a button shortcut). This is the full Google Assistant, meaning you can ask general questions, control smart home devices (via Google Home integration), dictate messages, set timers, etc. It’s fast and thanks to the newer processor, Assistant responses are swift. Notably, the upcoming Pixel Watch 4 is rumored to include an even more advanced “Assistant with Gemini AI” on-device, but the Pixel Watch 2 already provides the best Assistant experience on a watch aside from Samsung’s latest (more on that later). If you’re in the Google ecosystem, having Assistant on your wrist can be incredibly useful.
- The Fitbit Sense 2 opts for Amazon Alexa as its sole voice assistant. You set it up by linking your Amazon account in the Fitbit app. With Alexa on the Sense 2, you can do things like ask for weather, set reminders or alarms, control Alexa-compatible smart home devices (lights, thermostats, etc.), and even start an exercise or get your health stats by voice. The performance is decent, though Alexa requires the watch to be connected to your phone (it uses your phone’s internet). One nice aspect: Alexa on Sense 2 will respond with on-screen text (and vibration cues) rather than speaking out loud (the watch’s speaker is only used for calls, not Alexa responses), so it’s a bit more discreet. As mentioned, Google Assistant is not available on the Sense 2 – a deliberate omission by Google to differentiate the Pixel line. If you’re deep into Amazon’s ecosystem or just prefer Alexa, the Sense 2 covers you; if you wanted Assistant on your Fitbit, you’re out of luck.
- The Amazfit Balance actually supports two voice assistants: Amazon Alexa (online) and an offline assistant. Alexa on the Balance works similarly to Fitbit – you pair your Amazon account and use the watch’s mic to ask Alexa queries when the watch is connected to your phone’s internet. It can do the usual Alexa tasks: “Amazon Alexa Built-in… helps you check the weather, set an alarm, get a translation, and more,” as Amazfit advertises amazon.com. Additionally, the Balance has a feature called Zepp Voice (sometimes branded “Zepp Flow”). This is an offline voice command system where you can control certain watch functions without internet – for example, you might say “start a running workout” or “show my heart rate” and the watch will execute it, using a preset list of commands. This is useful if you’re out of network or just want a very fast, local command. It’s relatively unique (only a few Garmin watches have anything similar for offline use). Users on forums have noted you can even trigger the offline assistant with a wrist gesture on some Amazfit models reddit.com. While Alexa and offline commands on the Balance are handy, it’s fair to say they aren’t as expansive as Google Assistant on Pixel. Alexa can’t send WhatsApp messages or navigate for you on the watch (Pixel’s Assistant can do those via apps); Alexa mostly sticks to Alexa’s own skills. And the offline commands, while cool, are limited in scope. Still, it gives Amazfit an edge over many other “budget” smartwatches that have no voice control at all.
Payments and Other Smart Perks: A quick note on payments – Pixel Watch 2 and Fitbit Sense 2 both support contactless payments. Pixel uses Google Wallet, letting you tap-to-pay anywhere Google Pay is accepted (with credit cards, etc.) – this works very well and turns your watch into a wallet replacement. Sense 2 originally had Fitbit Pay, but since Google’s acquisition it also uses Google Wallet for payments. So both are essentially equal for NFC payments now. The Amazfit Balance includes an NFC chip too, but its payment system (Zepp Pay) is quite limited. As one review pointed out, it only works with certain bank cards (MasterCard/Maestro in limited regions, or via a third-party Curve service in Europe). So, using Balance to buy things is hit or miss depending on your bank/country – in contrast, Google Wallet on the other two will work in most places globally.
Music and Media: Another smart feature to consider: Pixel Watch 2 can stream music or even download tracks for offline playback (e.g. via YouTube Music or Spotify app) – you can pair Bluetooth earbuds to the watch and listen phone-free, which is great for runs. Fitbit Sense 2, as noted, has no ability to store or play music. It doesn’t have music apps or even control phone music reliably, which is a downside if you wanted to leave your phone behind for a workout with tunes (Fitbit is clearly steering music lovers toward the Pixel Watch). Amazfit Balance doesn’t have official music apps, but it does allow music controls – you can play/pause/skip the music playing on your phone using the watch as a remote. It also has a chunk of storage that in theory could load MP3 files via the Zepp app (some Amazfit models allow loading music files to the watch). Wired quipped “when was the last time you saw an MP3?” in criticism of Amazfit’s music approach – suggesting that while the watch might technically support local music, it’s an outdated method in the era of streaming. So for practical purposes, if music on-watch is a priority, Pixel Watch 2 is the only one of these three that truly supports that via modern streaming services.

In summary, Google Pixel Watch 2 offers the most complete suite of smart features: robust notification handling, on-wrist calls (with or without phone if LTE model), the almighty Google Assistant, extensive app integration, and fully functional pay/music capabilities. It’s the closest analog to an Apple Watch in the Android world. The Fitbit Sense 2 provides core smart features in a streamlined way: notifications (with basic replies on Android), Alexa for quick voice tasks, and phone call support – enough for most people’s day-to-day needs – plus the convenience of Google Wallet for payments. It deliberately avoids the more advanced apps and media features to keep things simple and battery life long. The Amazfit Balance surprisingly holds its own with things like Alexa and call support, but these can require a bit more patience to set up and may not be as frictionless. Its notification and voice features are adequate, though not as refined. Where it lags is in lacking true third-party app experiences – it’s not going to run WhatsApp or give you turn-by-turn Google Maps on the watch itself (though it can at least show you a breadcrumb navigation if you import a route). Essentially, Amazfit covers the basics and even some novel extras (offline voice control), but it’s a step behind a “true” smartwatch OS in smart capabilities. Depending on your needs – whether you want a watch that behaves like a phone (Pixel), a watch that supplements your phone quietly (Fitbit), or a watch that does a bit of both while staying phone-independent for weeks (Amazfit) – you have options.

Pricing and Value

When choosing a smartwatch, value for money is a big factor. Here’s how the three compare in pricing (as of 2025) and what you get at that price:

Google Pixel Watch 2: The Pixel Watch 2 launched at $349.99 in the US (around £349 in the UK or €399 in Europe) for the Wi-Fi only version. The LTE-enabled version was about $50 more at launch (roughly $399). This places the Pixel Watch 2 firmly in the premium price tier – similar to an Apple Watch Series 9 or Samsung Galaxy Watch in cost. As of now, you might find it on sale for a bit less (Wired noted it could be found around $300 on sale a year after launch). For that price, you’re getting high-end build materials (aluminum case, Gorilla Glass, etc.), a beautiful OLED display, and the richest features of the three watches. The Pixel Watch 2’s value proposition is strongest if you plan to use its full capabilities – i.e., if you’re an Android user who will utilize the apps, the Assistant, the Fitbit Premium features (it usually comes with a few months of Fitbit Premium trial, after which subscription is $9.99/mo for advanced analytics). If you just want basic fitness tracking, the Pixel may be overkill in both features and price. But if you want a smartwatch first that also does fitness well, the Pixel Watch 2 justifies its cost by replacing a lot of smartphone functions on your wrist. One could argue the Pixel Watch 2’s closest competitor, the Apple Watch, has even more polished app support – but on Android, Pixel Watch stands out as one of the priciest yet most capable options. Google does include 3 years of software updates in that price, ensuring some longevity. Still, $349 buys a lot in the smartwatch world, so Pixel Watch 2 is a premium investment for those who will make use of its breadth of features.
Fitbit Sense 2: The Sense 2 launched at $299.95 but by late 2023 had officially dropped to $249.99. These days, it’s often available on sale for around $200 or even less during big sales (Fitbit devices frequently get discounts). At ~$250 full retail, the Sense 2 offers a lot of technology for the price: an AMOLED display, all the key sensors (HR, ECG, EDA, GPS, etc.), and the excellent Fitbit app ecosystem. Compared to Pixel, it’s roughly $100 cheaper, making it a good value for someone who doesn’t need all the bells and whistles of Wear OS. Also, because it’s a bit older now (launched in 2022), the Sense 2 is commonly found at competitive prices – which can make it something of a bargain for the health features it packs. One thing to factor in: Fitbit Premium. Fitbit really nudges users into its $10/month Premium service for things like personalized insights, Daily Readiness Score, deeper sleep analysis, and exclusive workouts. The Sense 2 includes 6 months of Premium free for new users. After that, you can use the watch without Premium, but some advanced metrics (like the detailed breakdown of stress or the new cardio score, etc.) are gated. TechRadar noted that a “subscription is required to unlock its full powers” – this ongoing cost is worth considering when evaluating value. If you don’t intend to pay for Premium long-term, the Sense 2 still functions well, you just lose some advanced analytics (you’d still have basics like daily sleep score, etc., but not the trends). On the whole, the Sense 2’s value is strong for a mid-range smartwatch – it’s cheaper than flagship Apple/Pixel watches but offers some sensors even they don’t (continuous EDA). Given Google’s shift in strategy (no Sense 3 coming, as we’ll discuss), the Sense 2 might be one of the last Fitbit-brand watches, and retailers often mark it down accordingly. For cross-platform users (those who might switch between Android and iPhone), Sense 2 provides flexibility at a fair price. It’s an excellent value if you primarily care about health tracking and battery life, and are okay with limited smart features.
Amazfit Balance: The Balance entered the market at a lower price than the other two. Its MSRP was around $229–$249 (Amazfit’s US store listed it at $249, but it was often on Amazon for ~$200 or less). In fact, Wired’s review noted it was available for about $150 on sale at one point – a very aggressive price given its capabilities. Even the newer Balance 2 launched at $299, positioning the original Balance presumably around the $200 mark or below if stock remains. Simply put, the Amazfit Balance is the budget-friendly option here. For roughly half the cost of a Pixel Watch 2, you get a beautiful OLED display, built-in GPS, two-week battery, and a boatload of fitness features. That’s compelling for cost-conscious buyers. Amazfit achieves this lower price by cutting some corners in areas many users may find acceptable: the build uses less costly materials (no stainless steel or sapphire options, just aluminum/plastic), the software doesn’t have expensive licensed integrations (no on-device Google services), and there’s no costly cellular option. Additionally, Amazfit is made by Zepp (Huami), a Chinese company that doesn’t spend as much on marketing or ecosystem, allowing them to undercut bigger brands. When you look at pure specs-to-price, the Balance often outshines pricier watches. However, value is not just specs – it’s also the user experience, reliability, and support. This is where the Balance’s value proposition can dip if you’re unlucky: some users might encounter app bugs, or the data might not integrate with their favorite service, etc. Also, warranty and support might not be as robust or accessible as Google’s or Fitbit’s (Fitbit has a well-established support network and warranty process; Google does too). Amazfit offers a standard warranty but it may involve more hurdles if something goes wrong. That said, at ~$200, the Balance offers features like body composition and dual-band GPS that you’d typically need a $400+ watch (like a Garmin or Samsung) to get. It’s an excellent bang-for-buck device for tech-savvy users who can self-troubleshoot minor issues.

In terms of overall value: If you want top-tier smartwatch capabilities and are willing to pay premium prices, the Pixel Watch 2 justifies its cost by delivering on those features wired.com. If your budget is a bit lower and your focus is health tracking with good enough smarts, the Fitbit Sense 2 at ~$250 (often less on sale) is hard to beat – it’s a lot of health tech for the money, with the trusted Fitbit name (just beware the potential recurring Premium fee). The Amazfit Balance is the value wildcard – it’s by far the cheapest of the trio when discounts are in play, and it provides 80–90% of what average users need. The value equation there hinges on you being comfortable with a lesser-known brand and possibly fewer polish in software. For a budget under $200, the Balance (or its successor) is arguably one of the best deals on the market, period. It’s no wonder some reviewers boldly claimed “the Amazfit Balance is the best smartwatch you can buy” for the price-conscious.

Ultimately, each watch targets a slightly different segment:

Pixel Watch 2 – premium price, premium features (for Android enthusiasts who want it all).
Fitbit Sense 2 – mid-range price, specialized features (for wellness-focused users who value simplicity and battery).
Amazfit Balance – lower price, broad features (for those who want maximum specs per dollar and don’t mind a lesser-known ecosystem).

User Experience and Daily Use

Spec sheets and features aside, what are these watches like to live with day-to-day? Let’s discuss the general user experience, incorporating what expert reviewers and users have reported:

Pixel Watch 2 UX: Using the Pixel Watch 2 is often described as a “smartphone-like” experience on the wrist. The high-res touchscreen, fluid animations, and app-rich environment make it feel like a mini extension of your phone. Reviewers have praised its responsiveness – “I have yet to see any kind of stutter or lag…fairly rare for a Wear OS smartwatch. Finally.”. So, Google solved performance complaints that plagued some older models. The Pixel Watch’s interface (Wear OS with Google’s Pixel tweaks) is intuitive: swipe down for quick settings, swipe up for notifications, and the rotating crown scrolls smoothly through menus. The learning curve is moderate; if you’ve used any modern smartwatch, you’ll adapt quickly. One of the standout aspects is the tight integration with Android – for instance, if you’re navigating with Google Maps on your phone, the directions can automatically pop up on your watch; if you receive a two-factor authentication prompt on your Google account, you can approve it from the watch. Little conveniences like these make the Pixel Watch feel “seamless in everyday life.” It also has fun Pixel-specific perks, like Watch Unlock (using your watch to unlock your Android phone or Chromebook when nearby) and deep Fitbit integration for health data. However, the user experience isn’t without caveats. Battery life (as discussed) means you likely need a daily charging routine – perhaps every evening or while showering. Some users manage by charging in the morning while they get ready, to keep it on overnight for sleep tracking. It’s workable, but it does impose a routine. Another factor: the small screen size (1.2-inch diameter) and thick bezels, which some find limiting. Google cleverly uses black watch faces to hide the bezel, but when interacting, you might notice the usable area is less than an Apple Watch 45mm or a Galaxy Watch. If you have large hands or poor eyesight, tapping on small icons or typing on a tiny keyboard can be fiddly. There’s also the factor of Fitbit Premium – Pixel Watch basically uses the Fitbit app for health data, so after six months one might feel pressured to subscribe to keep features like Daily Readiness score. Some Pixel Watch owners who don’t care about those premium features can ignore it, but it’s part of the experience if you do. On the positive side, wearing the Pixel Watch 2 is very comfortable (the curved back and light weight make it easy to forget you’re wearing it wired.com). It’s stylish enough to blend with both workout gear and business attire, which users appreciate. One persistent complaint is the proprietary band system – while it’s easy to swap bands with the slide mechanism, you’re largely limited to Google’s band offerings or a smaller third-party selection, which tend to be expensive. This is a minor UX aspect but worth noting for personalization. Finally, one big concern echoed in reviews: repairability and support lifespan. Google only guarantees 3 years of updates and the watch’s hardware is not repairable (battery can’t be swapped etc.). Some users might worry about the device’s longevity. In daily life, that doesn’t affect the user experience now, but it’s something at the back of tech-savvy users’ minds – especially since Google talked up phone longevity but left the watch behind on that front. Overall, the Pixel Watch 2’s daily experience is one of delightful capability – it can do so much that you might find yourself using your phone less often. But you also need to be a bit mindful of its battery and somewhat gentle with its all-glass design.

Fitbit Sense 2 UX: The Sense 2 offers a “Zen” user experience, appropriate given its wellness focus. Many owners describe appreciating how it “just works” and doesn’t demand constant attention. The interface is extremely straightforward: swiping brings up daily stats or the notifications list, and the physical button reliably brings up either an app list or triggers Alexa (depending on settings). The absence of third-party apps means you won’t be tempted to doomscroll Twitter on your wrist or overload the watch with complications. For some, that’s a relief – as TechRadar put it, the Sense 2 is great for those who want “passive, casual health and fitness tracking” without gadget overwhelm. Indeed, the Sense 2 “demands less upkeep” not just in battery, but in mental load: you don’t have to manage many settings or apps. Everything you need lives in the Fitbit app on your phone, which consolidates health metrics simply. The watch’s on-device UI got an update with a vertical tiles layout (similar to Wear OS’s tiles) and it’s generally snappy thanks to the pared-down software. One could argue the UX is almost too basic – for instance, if a notification comes in that you want to act on heavily, you’ll likely still pick up your phone. But for many Fitbit loyalists, that’s fine because the real value is in checking your stress score or logging a mindfulness session, not replying to group chats from your wrist. Sleep tracking on the Sense 2, as part of UX, is excellent – wearing it to bed is comfortable due to its slimness, and in the morning you get a clear sleep score and even cute animal-based sleep chronotypes (if on Premium) that many users find motivating. One potential friction point: Fitbit Premium upsells. Within the Fitbit app, certain charts or recommendations are gated for Premium subscribers, which can annoy some users (the watch will for example record your stress events all day, but detailed analysis or long-term trends might say “Premium required”). This is something Wired’s review of Amazfit criticized about that platform’s upsells, but Fitbit does it too, albeit more gracefully. The Sense 2’s user experience is also enhanced by multi-platform support; pairing and syncing with either Android or iOS is generally painless. One noticeable difference if coming from an Apple or Pixel watch is that notifications on a Fitbit are less rich (often just plain text) and interactions are minimal. But again, if you treat the Sense 2 as a fitness-first device with some notifications and Alexa on the side, the experience is very smooth. You’re less likely to encounter bugs or crashes – Fitbit’s OS is stable and has been refined over years (though the Sense 2 did have some features missing at launch, like Google Maps, which were added later). In daily use, people love the Sense 2’s comfort and battery: you wear it and basically forget about the charger for nearly a week, something that significantly improves the UX compared to daily-charge watches. No need to worry if you tracked a long run today – it’ll still have plenty of battery for sleep tracking at night, reducing user anxiety about power. Summing up, using the Sense 2 is a lightweight, focused experience: it’s almost like a personal wellness assistant that sits quietly on your wrist, nudging you with insights (like a vibration and message if it senses high stress, asking if you want to do a relaxation exercise) and otherwise staying out of the way. It won’t wow you with flashy apps or graphical tricks, but it tends to delight you in subtle ways – like the relief of seeing 50% battery left on Day 4, or the gentle chime after you successfully log a mindful breathing session.

Amazfit Balance UX: The Balance aims to provide a feature-rich experience but has had some hiccups noted in reviews. On one hand, the watch interface itself is quite polished: Zepp OS has smooth animations, and you can even choose different UI themes (some Amazfits allow selecting different menu styles, etc.). Swiping and button navigation is fluid, and there are a ton of watch faces to choose from, letting users personalize the look more than on Fitbit or Pixel (unless you download third-party faces on Pixel). Users who enjoy tweaking settings will find many toggles in the Zepp app for the Balance – you can adjust sampling frequency of sensors, choose which metrics to display, etc. This can be empowering for advanced users but might overwhelm casual ones. Some early reviews (like Wired’s) highlighted software frustrations: for example, certain things had to be manually set up that ideally would be automatic. The reviewer had issues enabling message replies or getting the AI features to work properly wired.com. It suggests that the user experience can be less streamlined compared to Google or Fitbit. Amazfit’s companion app (Zepp) has improved a lot over the years – it’s now quite comprehensive, showing graphs for all your stats, and it can sync with Apple Health/Google Fit which is great for flexibility. But it’s also a bit “busy” visually, and not as refined as Fitbit’s app in terms of guiding the user. One UX aspect unique to Balance is the AI coaching: it offers a feature where an AI trainer can give feedback on your workouts or recovery. It sounds cool, but Wired’s tester found these AI insights not very useful. If you’re someone who likes exploring every feature, the Balance will keep you busy (there’s even a Morning Update that can read out your sleep and schedule, etc.). If you prefer straightforward, it might feel like too much. On the device, the Balance’s notification and call alerts are somewhat simpler in appearance than Pixel’s but similar to Fitbit’s – they pop up and you can dismiss them. The user experience for calls (if you enable them) is fine, though handling it in-app might be needed initially. Another point is reliability: some users online have reported that Amazfit’s algorithms (like calorie count or stress) can sometimes give odd values, or that the watch occasionally might need a reboot to fix a sync issue. These aren’t universal complaints, but they do crop up more with emerging platforms like Zepp OS than with, say, Fitbit. On the positive side, the Balance’s user experience around battery life is fantastic – not worrying about charging for many days changes how you use it. You can comfortably use the sleep tracking, continuous SpO₂, always-on display, etc., and still have plenty of battery, which encourages you to actually use those features (whereas on Pixel you might turn stuff off to save power). The display is large and bright, making it enjoyable to read stats or notifications at a glance; in fact, one could say the user experience of consuming information (like checking your pace mid-run, or glancing at the weather widget) is best on the Balance due to the big screen and long battery enabling always-on mode. It feels closer to a Garmin experience (minus some of Garmin’s ultra-polished training analytics). Privacy might be a small concern – some noted Amazfit’s privacy policy was hard to find or unclear wired.com, which could affect trust in the user experience for some. In day-to-day terms, unless you’re deeply concerned, this won’t be obvious, but it’s worth mentioning that Fitbit and Google have more transparent health data policies (Fitbit even under Google keeps data separate to some extent and adheres to certain regulations). So if you’re privacy-conscious, you might feel more peace of mind with Fitbit/Google than with Zepp/Amazfit, which could influence your comfort in using some features.

In essence, Amazfit Balance’s daily experience can be summarized as powerful but at times inconsistent. When everything works, it’s amazing that you have such a capable device with so few limitations on your wrist. But you may encounter a translation oddity here, a sync glitch there, or just the sense that the watch is trying to do so much that it occasionally trips over itself (like accidentally pausing workouts with a jacket touch wired.com). If you are tech-savvy and patient, these issues are minor and often resolved via updates or settings tweaks. The community of Amazfit users is quite enthusiastic and helps each other with tips, which says something about the type of user who enjoys these – tinkerers and fitness data geeks, primarily. Meanwhile, Fitbit Sense 2’s user experience is refined and restrained, making it ideal for someone who wants their watch to quietly enhance their wellbeing. And Pixel Watch 2’s user experience is dynamic and feature-rich, ideal for someone who loves having cutting-edge smart features and doesn’t mind a bit more hands-on device management (charging, updating apps, etc.).

Upcoming Models and Future Outlook

The smartwatch landscape is continually evolving. As of mid-2025, there are some exciting developments and rumors about upcoming models from Google, Fitbit (or rather Google’s Fitbit division), Amazfit, and other competing brands like Apple and Samsung. Here’s a brief look at what’s next:

Google and Fitbit – Pixel Watch 3, Pixel Watch 4, and the end of Fitbit Sense line?
Google has rapidly iterated on the Pixel Watch. In fact, a Pixel Watch 3 launched in late 2024 (alongside the Pixel 9 phones). The Pixel Watch 3 finally introduced a larger 45mm size option, addressing the complaint of a too-small screen. Tom’s Guide noted, “The Pixel Watch 3 finally comes in a larger 45mm size option… thanks to its better battery life, a larger screen, …”. The 45mm model brought a bigger battery, reportedly pushing endurance closer to 2 days even with heavy use. Pixel Watch 3 also kept a 41mm size for those who prefer smaller. Other improvements included thinner bezels, a brighter display, and new health features like skin temperature sensing during workouts (Pixel 2’s sensor was underutilized but Pixel 3 software made more of it). Now on the horizon is the Pixel Watch 4, which is heavily rumored to debut at Google’s event in August 2025. According to leaks compiled by Tom’s Guide, Pixel Watch 4 might not change the circular design much, but could pack a bigger battery, faster charging, and even new life-saving tools. Rumored upgrades include dual-band GPS for better accuracy (catching up with Amazfit’s tech), an additional physical button (perhaps for quick launching apps), and potentially wireless charging compatibility (so it can charge on standard Qi pads). There’s also talk of on-device AI with Google’s upcoming “Gemini” Assistant – meaning a more powerful voice assistant that can function with less internet reliance. Additionally, Google might improve repairability after criticism (one rumor suggests improved reparability in the Pixel Watch 4 line). Pricing is expected to remain in the same range ($349+). So, for Android users looking ahead, the Pixel Watch 2 is no longer the latest and greatest – Pixel Watch 3 is available now with notable improvements, and Pixel Watch 4 could raise the bar further in late 2025 with more battery life and safety features (like possibly a satellite SOS messaging feature similar to phones).

On the Fitbit side, it appears we won’t see a Sense 3 or Versa 5 in the foreseeable future. Google has essentially decided to fold high-end Fitbit smartwatches into the Pixel line. In 2024, a Google spokesperson even stated “the next iteration of the smartwatch for Fitbit will be the Pixel Watch”. In other words, Google is phasing out Fitbit-branded smartwatches like the Sense and Versa series. The Sense 2 and Versa 4 (released 2022) continue to be sold, but there’s an expectation they will eventually be discontinued with no direct successors. This is corroborated by tech news reporting that Google’s focus is solely on Pixel Watch for wearables, effectively marking “the end of an era for Fitbit smartwatches”. Fitbit as a brand will live on for fitness trackers (bands like Inspire or Charge) and the app services, but if you want a new Fitbit smartwatch, it’s likely going to be a Pixel Watch. For current Sense 2 owners, this means your device is still supported, but you shouldn’t hold out for a Sense 3 – instead, future upgrades would be to a Pixel Watch (which, as we discussed, already integrates a lot of Fitbit tech). Fitbit’s fitness trackers are still getting updates – e.g., the Charge 6 launched in late 2023 with some Pixel Watch features like Google Maps navigation on the band, and an Inspire 3 refresh is hinted at. Also, Fitbit released a kids smartwatch (Fitbit Ace with LTE) in 2024, showing they’re targeting specific niches rather than general smartwatches. So going forward, expect Fitbit’s DNA to show up in Pixel Watches (like more Fitbit features in Wear OS), but not new hardware under the Fitbit name at the high end. It’s a bittersweet development for Fitbit fans – on one hand, Pixel Watches are getting better; on the other, the beloved simplicity of Fitbit watches might be gone after Sense 2.

Amazfit and Other Alternatives – Balance 2 and more:
Amazfit isn’t sitting still either. They have released the Amazfit Balance 2 in 2025, which takes the formula of the Balance and pushes it further. The Balance 2 boasts an even larger battery (658 mAh) that stretches use to an advertised 21 days on a charge – truly astounding battery life, though that’s under optimal conditions. It also upgrades the display (a 1.5-inch screen capable of up to 3000 nits brightness according to some reports) and packs 170+ sport modes. Essentially, Amazfit is doubling down on the “high spec, long battery” niche. Early hands-on coverage praised the Balance 2’s premium build and faster performance, saying it has a refined design and interface while keeping the multi-week endurance. Amazfit also introduced a novel accessory called the Helio Strap, which when paired with the Balance 2, can provide advanced health metrics (it’s a smart strap that apparently measures things like muscle activation or fatigue). A tech snippet noted combining the Balance 2 with the Helio Strap enhances recovery tracking. This shows Amazfit’s strategy to compete by innovating in areas like recovery and training load – taking aim at brands like Garmin. Speaking of which, Garmin remains a strong competitor in the fitness-oriented smartwatch space. By 2025, Garmin has released models like the Forerunner 965, Fenix 7 series, and others with high accuracy metrics, multi-week battery life (especially on solar models), and even satellite texting (Garmin’s Instinct 2X can send SOS via satellite with a paired device). While Garmin wasn’t the focus of this comparison, it’s a brand many consider as an alternative especially to Amazfit, since they prioritize similar things (battery, rugged build, extreme fitness tracking). Of course, Garmin’s watches generally lack bright OLEDs and some smart features, but are worth mentioning in the future landscape.

On the Apple and Samsung front (the elephants in the room):

Apple Watch: Apple continues to refine its watch lineup. In 2024, Apple launched the Apple Watch Series 10 (unofficially dubbed the “X”) which was a 10th-anniversary redesign with a thinner case and a new ultra-clear microLED display for the high-end model, according to some reports. By 2025, Apple is expected to release the Apple Watch Series 11 (likely around September 2025). Rumors suggest Apple is focusing on new health features like blood pressure monitoring in Series 11. Indeed, Mark Gurman (a reliable Apple insider) reported that “high blood pressure detection is coming with Apple Watch Series 11,” which would alert users to potential hypertension. Apple is also likely adding a faster S11 chip and, interestingly, possibly 5G connectivity to the Apple Watch for the first time (using a low-power 5G standard called RedCap). This could make cellular Apple Watches even more capable. Meanwhile, the rugged Apple Watch Ultra line is also evolving – an Apple Watch Ultra 3 is rumored with perhaps improved sensors or even satellite communication. Apple is reportedly exploring noninvasive blood glucose monitoring, though that may be years away. All in all, Apple Watches remain the benchmark for integrated experience (if you have an iPhone) and Apple is doubling down on health (blood pressure, possibly sleep apnea detection via breathing disruptions, etc.). For those in the Apple ecosystem, the Series 11 and Ultra 3 coming in late 2025 will likely be state-of-the-art (but of course, they only work with iPhones).
Samsung Galaxy Watch: Samsung, as Google’s main partner in Wear OS, launched the Galaxy Watch 6 in 2023 and the Galaxy Watch 7 in mid-2024. Now in summer 2025, Samsung has unveiled the Galaxy Watch 8 series. The Galaxy Watch 8 introduced some cutting-edge tech: notably, it’s the first to integrate a new AI voice assistant (Gemini AI) built-in that can operate without a phone for complex queries. This hints at Samsung leveraging Google’s Gemini AI platform (or their own) so that the watch can handle more natural language requests on-device. Reviews of the Galaxy Watch 8 indicate Samsung also boosted the screen brightness up to an eye-searing 3000 nits for outdoor readability, and made battery improvements along with keeping its trademark features like the rotating bezel (on the Classic model) and comprehensive health suite (ECG, body composition, temperature, etc.). In fact, Samsung watches (from Watch 4 onward) have body composition via BIA, similar to Amazfit Balance, plus things like blood pressure (in some regions) with calibration. The Galaxy Watch 8 also reportedly integrates tightly with Samsung’s new phones and possibly their AI “Gemini” features to do things like summarize notifications or health trends (this is speculation based on the AI integration). Samsung did bump prices slightly on the Watch 8, making them roughly equal or slightly more than Pixel Watch prices. Looking ahead, Samsung might even be exploring a Galaxy Watch Ultra concept to directly compete with Apple Ultra in durability, but for now the Watch 8 and Watch 8 Classic (2025) are their flagships. They remain probably the closest direct competitor to Pixel Watch 3/4 in the Android camp, offering more sizes and typically more health sensors (but shorter battery than Amazfit or Fitbit).

Other players: Other notable competing brands include Garmin (as mentioned, for fitness enthusiasts; by 2025 Garmin’s OS even added some smart features like a Spotify app, but they focus on GPS and battery), Huawei (with its GT series offering 2-week battery and solid health tracking, albeit limited app support internationally), and Wear OS newcomers (several fashion brands like Fossil continue releasing Wear OS 4 watches, and even Xiaomi and Oppo have their watches, though those are often regional). We also see growth in hybrid smartwatches and smart rings (Oura Ring, etc.), for those exploring alternatives to wrist wearables entirely.

In summary, the future is vibrant:

Google’s Pixel Watch line is rapidly innovating (annual releases) – expect the Pixel Watch 4 in late 2025 with improved hardware and possibly new Fitbit-driven features like advanced stress or even glucose tracking if tech allows down the line.
The Fitbit brand’s future in smartwatches is on pause – the Sense 2 might be the last of its kind, as Google consolidates.
Amazfit is pushing boundaries on battery and price, with the Balance 2 and likely more models focusing on delivering max value for fitness tracking (Garmin beware).
Apple and Samsung continue to add cutting-edge health features (blood pressure detection by Apple, advanced AI assistance by Samsung) that will raise the bar for all smartwatches.
Competing health wearables like upcoming Apple Watch Series 11 will even tackle hypertension alerts, showing how these devices are increasingly becoming health monitors as much as gadgets.

For consumers, this means more choices than ever. If you’re in the Android world, the Pixel Watch family and Samsung’s Galaxy Watches will vie for your attention with high-end capabilities, while brands like Amazfit offer compelling alternatives at lower cost and insane battery life. If you’re more fitness-focused, Garmin and others are there too. The key takeaway: the smartwatch market in late 2025 and beyond is moving toward devices that can do more (AI, advanced health sensing) while also lasting longer and suiting diverse needs. Our three compared watches – Pixel Watch 2, Fitbit Sense 2, and Amazfit Balance – each illustrate a different philosophy, and their successors will likely continue in those trajectories (Pixel: more power and integration; Fitbit: niche if any; Amazfit: more battery and value).

Conclusion

Choosing between the Google Pixel Watch 2, Fitbit Sense 2, and Amazfit Balance ultimately comes down to your priorities and ecosystem. All three are capable smartwatches with a focus on health and fitness, but they carve out different niches:

Google Pixel Watch 2 is the premium all-rounder for Android users. It offers the most robust smart features – from a rich app ecosystem to on-wrist Google Assistant and seamless notifications – essentially serving as an Android smartphone companion on your wrist. It doesn’t skimp on health either, with Fitbit-powered tracking, ECG, stress sensing, and more, but its battery life (1–2 days) is the price of that power. Expert reviewers consider it a huge improvement over the first Pixel Watch – “the rare sequel that’s better than the original” – finally delivering a polished experience with all-day battery and smooth performance. At ~$350 it’s an investment, but one that pays off if you’ll use its advanced capabilities. Pixel Watch 2 is ideal for someone who wants a stylish, do-it-all smartwatch, values deep integration with Google services, and is okay charging daily. With Pixel Watch 3 now out and a Pixel Watch 4 on the horizon, Google’s watch lineup is only getting stronger, inheriting the mantle of Fitbit’s legacy in a more powerful form.
Fitbit Sense 2 is the holistic wellness tracker that doubles as a basic smartwatch. Priced around $250 (often less on sale), it concentrates on fitness and health monitoring – delivering top-notch sleep tracking, round-the-clock stress detection, reliable heart health features (EDA and ECG), and nearly week-long battery life that leaves competitors in the dust. It runs a simpler, closed software that won’t overload you with extraneous apps. As one reviewer summed up, “The Fitbit Sense 2 is an advanced fitness-tracking smartwatch, with great battery life, and tools to help manage your physical health and mood”. You won’t get the bells and whistles of third-party apps or Google Assistant, but you do get essentials like notifications, calls, contactless payments, and Alexa – just enough smart features for convenience. The Sense 2 is perfect for someone who wants a no-fuss health and fitness companion that they can wear 24/7 (and across Android or iOS) without worrying about daily charging or complex settings. Its user experience is focused and calm – exactly what many look for in a wellness device. With no Sense 3 coming, the Sense 2 remains one of the best pure health-centric smartwatches you can buy, especially at its price point, as long as you don’t need the expanded app ecosystem.
Amazfit Balance is the value innovator that pushes boundaries in battery and bang-for-buck. For roughly $200 (often less), it offers an impressive array of features: a bright OLED display, 2-week battery life, comprehensive fitness tracking with 150+ sports, advanced metrics like body composition analysis, and even Amazon Alexa built-in. It’s a testament to how far affordable smartwatches have come – “exceptional battery life, precise GPS, excellent fitness tracking… at a great price”, as one tech review concluded. The Balance does have some software quirks and lacks the polished app store of a Pixel, but it nails the basics and then some. It’s a great choice for a tech-savvy user or fitness enthusiast on a budget who wants maximum features per dollar and hates frequent charging. The build is attractive and lightweight, making it a pleasure to wear, and Amazfit’s Zepp app provides a wealth of data (if occasionally overwhelming). The Balance shows you can get a large dose of smartwatch functionality without paying premium brand prices. Just be prepared for a bit more tinkering to get the most out of it. With the even more powerful Balance 2 now emerging, Amazfit is proving to be a formidable competitor, often delivering 80% of what flagship watches do at half the price.

In a head-to-head-to-head summary: Pixel Watch 2 is for the user who wants a cutting-edge smartwatch experience and tight integration in the Android world; Fitbit Sense 2 is for the user who prioritizes health insights and hassle-free longevity in a device, essentially a wellness tracker with a sprinkle of smart features; and Amazfit Balance is for the user who seeks a middle ground – lots of features and amazing battery at a friendly price – and doesn’t mind if the platform is a bit different from the big names.

It’s an exciting time to be in the market for a smartwatch. Whether you’re a fitness buff, a tech enthusiast, or someone aiming to improve your health, these devices have something to offer. The choice might ultimately hinge on which ecosystem you prefer and which features matter most to you. But no matter which you choose, one thing is clear from all the expert feedback: modern smartwatches like the Pixel Watch 2, Fitbit Sense 2, and Amazfit Balance have evolved far beyond step-counters. They are veritable health monitors and smart assistants on the wrist, each with their own strengths. As technology and healthcare converge, we can look forward to even more capable wearables – from Pixel’s AI-driven safety features to Fitbit’s deep health analytics to Amazfit’s innovative battery tech – making it easier for all of us to stay connected, informed, and healthy.

Sources:

Song, Victoria. “Google Pixel Watch 2 review: better battery, better watch.” The Verge, Oct 11, 2023.
Gibbs, Samuel. “Pixel Watch 2 review: Google smartwatch gets speed and battery boost.” The Guardian, Oct 26, 2023.
Kozuch, Kate. “Fitbit Sense 2 review: top-tier health and fitness tracking, with some quirks.” Tom’s Guide, Feb 13, 2024.
Williams, Andrew. “Fitbit Sense 2 review: Fitbit Sense 2 is a good fitness device, but lacks the smarts of a watch.” TechRadar, Dec 7, 2022.
So, Adrienne. “Review: Amazfit Balance – Most Improved, Still Exasperating.” Wired, Mar 16, 2024. wired.com
Android Police. “Fight me: The Amazfit Balance is the best smartwatch you can buy.” (via Yahoo syndication), Aug 2023.
Henry, Joseph. “No Fitbit Sense 3 or Versa 5: Google Focuses Solely on Pixel Watch.” TechTimes, Aug 14, 2024.
Bracaglia, Dan. “Google Pixel Watch 4 — all the rumors and leaks so far.” Tom’s Guide, Aug 14, 2025.
Christoffel, Ryan. “Apple Watch Series 11: Three new features coming next month.” 9to5Mac, Aug 15, 2025.
Tom’s Guide. “Meet the Samsung Galaxy Watch 8 — the first Android smartwatch with Gemini AI built in.” Aug 2025.

Top Smartwatches 2025 – Which One’s On Your Wrist?

Watch this video on YouTube.

Tags: Smartwatch, Tech Comparison, Wearables