Polar – announces Whoop competitor.

Polar has just confirmed that it will launch a Whoop competitor on September 3rd – scroll down to see a detailed comparison of the Whoop app to Polar FLOW. (Reviews of the actual device won’t be available until September, but each company’s apps will be similar to those in use today.)

Background

Whoop has seen runaway commercial success in recent years, establishing itself as the only company to offer a fully integrated sleep, activity, recovery, and coaching platform built around a discrete, display-free band. Its appeal lies in its sleek design, science-backed insights, and a highly polished mobile app – the best on the market. At the core of Whoop’s ecosystem is its proprietary optical heart rate sensor, which powers its key metrics, including Strain, Recovery, and Sleep Performance. With the recent launch of its latest band, Whoop 5.0 has locked in its hardware direction for the next three years. It has shown its hand and now will only compete for our wrist space by refining its app features.

Polar, meanwhile, brings a deep legacy in sports science, particularly in heart rate monitoring. Once the industry leader, Polar developed some of the earliest consumer-grade heart rate monitors and remains the gold standard in many research settings. Even its proprietary, previous-generation optical sensor (Precision Prime) performs excellently when worn on the biceps, and its H10 chest strap is regarded as the most accurate ECG-based consumer device.

Like Whoop, Polar offers an app filled with rich insights spanning sleep, training load, recovery, and wellness metrics. Its latest optical sensor, the Polar 360 (Precision-Prime-based sensor), is currently limited to B2B applications. However, I expect the latest Elixir tech to power the new consumer band launching on September 3rd. That sensor, however, remains untested in independent reviews, in a band format and on the biceps. That said,  its predecessor, the Polar Sense, while respected in arm-worn configurations, was also rarely evaluated on the wrist.

And this is where the real challenge begins: once any brand—including Polar—moves to wrist-based optical heart rate measurement, it must contend with the same motion artefacts and signal noise that Whoop has spent years refining its algorithms to address. Admittedly, so has Polar with its older PRECISION PRIME Sensor on its watches – but remember, a lighter band-only device makes it easier to get slightly more accurate HR.

What is announced today by Polar

Polar has only confirmed today that it will be launching a new category of product on September 3rd. It will NOT be subscription-based. It will be the first screen-free wrist wearable from the company and is designed as a passive data collector for sleep, activity, health, and fitness, with no notifications.

My take is that it is clear that Polar will be offering a wearable in the format of a band, probably almost certainly containing the new Elixir sensor. This will be a direct competitor to the Whoop 5.0 in terms of technology. I expect no new features of significance, just repurposed hardware and a similar Polar FLOW app.

Comparing Whoop to Polar/Flow

It would be reasonable to assume that a Polar Elixir-based strap has comparable accuracy to Whoop. Accuracy is unlikely to be a differentiator.

So the success of Polar’s new strap will likely come down to (lifestyle) marketing and the quality of the app experience – its features and presentation.

Presentation

I don’t want to dwell on this too much here, but in a nutshell, Whoop’s app looks better.

Marketing

Again, in a nutshell, Whoop has superior marketing and positioning in the segments it targets. Its marketing is perhaps more innovative and relies much more heavily on influencers and pro-ambassadors than Polar.

Focus

Once again, Whoop performs well in the critical North American market, one of Polar’s weaker markets.

By my estimation, Whoop’s direct-to-consumer subscription model might outperform Polar’s channel hardware profitability on a 3:1 basis – ie Polar might have to sell 3 (or more) devices to match the gross profit of Whoop from one subscription. Polar has introduced a modest paywall for select training plans, but specifically says that its new band will be subscription-free.

Whoop has one focus. Polar has many.

Product Portfolio

Polar has a superior range of products and product types. It can cross-sell other Polar products to meet the daily needs of almost any customer and is de-risked in some sense as a result. Whoop can only sell them its band with changeable straps or clothing – though I suspect that will change soon if Whoop introduces a proprietary chest strap to the mix. That’s still a limited product range, though.

The Key Bit – The App Experience & Competence

Let’s compare the features.

App Ecosystem Head-to-head: Polar vs Whoop summary

• Polar Flow: Best for athletes needing structured workout support, sport-specific tracking, and multi-platform access without a subscription. Strong sleep and recovery metrics. Ideal for runners, cyclists, and multi-sport enthusiasts. However, the app’s UI feels dated.

• Whoop App: Excels in holistic strain, recovery, and lifestyle tracking with a user-friendly interface. Ideal for users prioritising recovery insights and community motivation. Lacks workout guidance. Recent step tracking and Apple Health integration enhance its appeal, but it’s less versatile for structured training.

Take Out

Whoop is getting the competitors it managed to avoid for years. Garmin’s Sleep Band, Amazfit Helios, and now Polar’s strap are all similar, but different in how they will compete.

Many readers of this site and elsewhere have commented on their desire for a more affordable alternative to Whoop, as well as expressed incredulity that companies like Garmin and Polar have never attempted to compete with Whoop. Now they have.

I suspect this is going to pan out in unexpected ways.

I suspect Whoop will continue to grow, but that some of the new competitors will temper its growth. It will continue to grow because its overall offering is good and relatively unique, significantly aided by its distinct lifestyle proposition. Whoop is NOT expensive to many of the people it targets.

Polar is generally not going to target those same people at the high end, although there will be some overlap. I suspect Polar will have significant wins in Europe (its main customer stronghold), where existing customers will purchase one to complement their watches, and Polar could capture a substantial portion of the more price-sensitive lower end of the market in most geographies.

Garmin’s new, albeit somewhat limited, sleep-focused offering will primarily appeal to its existing, large customer base, rather than to new customers considering Garmin as an option.

Other wrist straps, such as Amazfit Helios/Hyrox and Biostrap EVO/KAIROS, will remain highly niche-focused, except that the former might have success in Asian markets.

To maximise the benefits of FLOW’s existing competencies, Polar’s new product will need to be more than just a heart rate strap (Polar SENSE). It will need to have an accelerometer to capture motion data (such as sleep movements and steps) and leverage additional data points, like skin temperature and SpO2, to improve sleep analyses. In short, the device needs to mimic the abilities of Whoop’s sensors.

Bottom Line: With a decent app (that still needs a tweak) and a sensible price strategy Polar should have a success on its hands.

Sources & Resources:

More: Polar.com Elixir technology explainer

More: Whoop 5.0 – initial ‘review’, competencies and thoughts

More: Polar PRECISION Prime (older tech) – white paper