INTRODUCTION:
Smartwatches are essential for daily exercise management, yet inconsistent nomenclature, measurement and calculation methods, and data representations across brands hinder integration. Systematic understanding of brand-specific metrics is essential for consistent evaluation in integrated platforms. This study analyzes exercise metrics from nine brands to provide information for algorithm design.
METHODS:
Exercise evaluation metrics were collected from official manuals and usability tests of nine brands: Apple, Coros, Garmin, Huawei, Pixel, Samsung, Suunto, Whoop, and Xiaomi. Collected metrics were classified and analyzed from five perspectives: (1) quantitative versus qualitative evaluation, (2) absolute versus relative evaluation, (3) one-time versus cumulative metrics, (4) measurement unit classification (Energy, Time, Motion, Physiology, Score, Dashboard, and Null), and (5) exercise type classification (walking, running, cycling, swimming, aerobic, and strength training). Each brand's metrics were analyzed by distinguishing common metrics from exercise-type-specific metrics.
RESULTS:
A total of 1,557 exercise evaluation metrics were collected from nine brands, with brand-specific counts of Garmin 469, Coros 244, Samsung 180, Huawei 159, Apple 144, Pixel 137, Suunto 124, Xiaomi 112, and Whoop 104. Quantitative metrics were most numerous in Garmin with 113, followed by Coros with 84 and Apple with 78. Garmin also led in qualitative metrics with 36, followed by Suunto with 22 and Coros with 17. For absolute evaluation metrics, Garmin provided 148, Coros 101, and Apple 92, while relative evaluation metrics were offered by only Garmin, Huawei, Pixel, and Xiaomi with one each. One-time metrics numbered 135 for Garmin, 90 for Coros, and 87 for Huawei, while cumulative metrics were relatively fewer at 14 for Garmin, 11 for Coros, and 6 for Samsung. In measurement unit analysis, Garmin provided the most metrics across all categories (Energy 18, Time 27, Motion 46, Physiology 19, Score 27, Dashboard 7, and Null 5). Across all brands, Motion unit metrics averaged 23.6, the highest, followed by Physiology 15.2, Time 14.9, Score 14.4, and Energy 9.1. By exercise type, running-related metrics were most abundant (Garmin 83, Coros 65, Huawei 56), followed by walking (Garmin 64, Coros 49, Huawei 49), cycling (Garmin 72, Coros 43, Apple 37), and strength training (Garmin 44, Coros 32, Huawei 24).
CONCLUSION:
Garmin provides the most comprehensive metric system, with clear brand-specific differences confirmed. Cumulative metrics require long-term data for refinement. This study provides fundamental information for integrated exercise evaluation algorithm development by systematic analysis of 1,557 metrics and is expected to contribute to wearable-based digital healthcare platform standardization.