GPS Watches and Running Tech
A running watch gives you distance, pace, heart rate and estimates of fitness, recovery and sleep. Runsense's approach is to treat the watch as a record and a nudge. Trust it most for distance in the open and for heart rate on a steady run with a snug band, use a chest strap when exact heart rate matters, and go by effort and feel over any estimate. The studies tested particular models and models change, so this guide gives the reasons and the size of the errors. This is general training guidance.
Distance and pace
Let the watch find satellites before you start, and expect a few percent of error in distance, more under trees and between tall buildings. In a 2020 comparison of eight sport watches from Apple, Coros, Garmin, Polar and Suunto in urban, forest and track areas, mean error ranged from 3.2% to 6.1%, with distances underestimated and less accurate in the urban and forest areas1. Across ten smartwatches, error ranged from 0.8% to 12.1% over six 4,000 m runs on a track and from 0.2% to 7.5% over six hilly outdoor runs of 3.4 km, and for some watches the results deviated substantially from the true values2.
So a watch distance is an estimate. On a route you know, check it against the measured distance. On a twisty, tree-covered or city route, go by effort for pace. In a race, go by the course markers when they disagree with your watch.
Heart rate, wrist or chest strap
On a steady treadmill run, wrist optical heart rate is close to a chest strap or an ECG. A 2020 systematic review of 44 articles (15 brands) found wrist readings were off by about half a beat a minute on average during treadmill walking to running, and by more during resistance training (about 7 beats) and cycling (about 4.5 beats). The authors concluded wrist devices had acceptable validity for most common activities3. An average hides the errors of individual readings. Across ten smartwatches, 30 people ran five 3-minute treadmill intervals, and the mean absolute percentage error for average heart rate ranged from 3.1% to 8.3% against a chest strap2.
Use a chest strap when exact heart rate matters, such as heart rate intervals or trail running. In a 2020 study of 21 people on a 3.22 km out-and-back trail run with a chest strap as the reference, a wrist watch had a mean absolute percent error of 13%, a forearm band 6%, and a watch worn with its paired chest strap 2%. The authors concluded all the optical devices agreed poorly during variable-intensity trail running and that heart rate outdoors should come from a chest strap connected to a watch4.
Wear the wrist band snug. In a 2023 test of one wrist monitor in 30 people on a treadmill and a bicycle ergometer against a 10-lead ECG, the error on the treadmill was 16.1% with a normally tight band and 8.1% with the band tightened as far as tolerable, and it was higher in transitions than in steady state (9.0% against 7.6%)5.
VO2max, threshold, recovery and sleep numbers
These numbers are calculated from other measurements, and the studies found larger errors than for heart rate itself. In 19 people, an Apple Watch Series 7 VO2max estimate averaged 4.5 mL/kg/min below the laboratory value, with a mean error of 15.79%, and the authors described the reliability as poor6. In 34 people, a Google Pixel Watch 3 estimate was close on average (bias -0.53 mL/kg/min) but for an individual could be off by about 12 mL/kg/min either way, and the authors said the estimates lack individual-level validity for clinical use7.
For threshold, 100 recreational runners did a laboratory graded test and then outdoor tests with smartwatches. Threshold heart rate showed no significant difference from the laboratory method on average, with mean absolute errors of 8.93 to 11.44 beats a minute, and the authors said the watches tend to overestimate threshold pace8. For heart rate zones, Runsense reads your threshold from a hard effort you ran. See the guide on testing your lactate threshold heart rate.
Treat recovery and readiness scores as a nudge to check how you feel, not a verdict. In 39 adults wearing an activity tracker for three months, self-reported stress and nervousness were not associated with overnight heart rate variability, and feeling energized went with lower variability (64.1 against 66.9 ms). The authors cautioned against relying on HRV-based recommendations9.
A watch's sleep total runs high. In 70 masters endurance athletes wearing a research-grade wrist sensor and a Garmin smartwatch for 7 nights, the smartwatch recorded sleep 126 minutes longer than the research sensor and the diary 109 minutes longer, and the authors advised caution, particularly in athletes with shorter or more fragmented sleep10. Use the trend over weeks and not a single night, and see the guide on sleep.
How a watch connects to Runsense
Runsense reads runs from Apple Health or from direct connections to Strava, Suunto, Polar and COROS. Garmin has no direct connection, so a Garmin run arrives through Strava or Apple Health. A direct connection brings the whole recording the provider holds, while a run relayed through Apple Health can arrive with fewer heart rate samples, depending on the app that wrote it. Where a connection carries them, Runsense also reads a watch's own overnight sleep, resting heart rate and heart rate variability.
For Suunto, Runsense also sends upcoming sessions to the watch as SuuntoPlus guides, on Suunto watches that support SuuntoPlus. For an Apple Watch, it schedules upcoming sessions in Apple's Workout app. COROS is a connection for runs and nightly data only, and Runsense does not send workouts to a COROS watch.
Safety
A watch's heart rate, sleep or recovery number is not a medical test. Chest pain, fainting, unusual breathlessness or a very fast or irregular heartbeat need medical attention whatever the watch shows, and a normal reading does not rule out a problem.
Sources
- Gilgen-Ammann R, Schweizer T, Wyss T. Accuracy of Distance Recordings in Eight Positioning-Enabled Sport Watches: Instrument Validation Study. JMIR mHealth and uHealth 8(6):e17118 (2020). (Eight sport watches (Apple, Coros, Garmin, Polar, Suunto), 3 x 12 distance measurements in urban, forest and track and field areas, walking, running and cycling) ↩
- Jacko T, Bartsch J, von Diecken C, Ueberschar O. Validity of Current Smartwatches for Triathlon Training: How Accurate Are Heart Rate, Distance, and Swimming Readings? Sensors 24(14) (2024). (Ten smartwatches; 30 participants (15 females, 15 males) ran five 3-minute treadmill intervals for heart rate; distance over six 4000 m track runs, six hilly 3.4 km runs, four 36.8 km bike rides, and swim tests) ↩
- Zhang Y, Weaver RG, Armstrong B, Burkart S, Zhang S, Beets MW. Validity of Wrist-Worn photoplethysmography devices to measure heart rate: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Sports Sciences 38(17):2021-2034 (2020). (Systematic review and meta-analysis of 44 articles, 738 comparisons, 15 brands, wrist optical heart rate against ECG or chest strap) ↩
- Bretonneau Q, Peruque-Gayou E, Wolfs E, Bosquet L. Parameters Influencing the Accuracy of a Wrist Photoplethysmography Heart-Rate Monitor (Polar Unite) During Exercise. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance 18(4):440-443 (2023). (30 participants (50% female), two 13-minute treadmill and bicycle ergometer sequences, one wrist monitor with normal and maximum tolerable band tightness against a 10-lead ECG) ↩
- Caserman P, Yum S, Gobel S, Reif A, Matura S. Assessing the Accuracy of Smartwatch-Based Estimation of Maximum Oxygen Uptake Using the Apple Watch Series 7: Validation Study. JMIR Biomedical Engineering 9:e59459 (2024). (19 participants (7 female, 12 male, aged 18 to 63), Apple Watch Series 7 VO2max estimate against a cycle ergometer test with a gas analyzer) ↩
- Lambe R, Schumann M, Hamilton S, Donnelly L, White T, O'Reilly S, et al. The accuracy of VO2 max, heart rate and energy expenditure measurements from Google Pixel Watch 3. PLoS ONE 21(9):e0356808 (2026). (34 participants, maximal treadmill test with indirect calorimetry and a Polar H10 chest strap, Pixel Watch 3 estimates) ↩
- Lu C, Cui W, Zhu Z, Wu Y, Xing Q, Pan B, et al. Validity of smartwatch-derived estimates of lactate threshold heart rate and pace compared to graded exercise testing. Frontiers in Physiology 16:1621996 (2025). (100 healthy recreational runners, laboratory graded test then outdoor smartwatch tests (Huawei n = 100, Garmin n = 23, Coros n = 17)) ↩
- Ungaro CT, Wolfe AS, Isaacs ZJ, De Chavez PJD, Freese EC. Disconnection Between Self-Reported Wellbeing and Heart Rate Variability from Wearables. Sensors 26(4) (2026). (39 adults (21 males, 18 females) wearing an activity tracker for three months with daily self-reports) ↩
- Devrim-Lanpir A, Devenney S, Egan B. Evaluation of the Agreement Between Research-Grade Actigraphy Sleep, Consumer-Grade Smartwatches and Self-Reported Sleep Diaries in Masters Endurance Athletes. Journal of Sleep Research 34(6):e70177 (2025). (70 masters endurance athletes (43 males, 27 females), ActiGraph GT9X and a Garmin smartwatch worn for 7 nights with a sleep diary) ↩
One running guide a week.
Calm, useful, no spam. Plain-English coaching from the Runsense team, once a week.