Fitbit Flex vs Heart Rate Monitor

For what this is worth... I have a Fitbit One and a mio Alpha HRM that I use with Digifit and have set up with custom zones based on an assessment built into Digifit. The Alpha is convenient for an HRM - no chest strap, no periodic touching of contacts, just buckle it tight and start the app and go. I wear the One on my waistband, not (ew) in a bra. Here's what I've found so far.

The Fitbit and the HRM pretty much agree with each other about the calorie burn from walking and running on flattish surfaces, and real hills or stairs.

Neither one is very effective at tracking a burn from strength training; the HRM doesn't handle all that wrist bending very well. Another HRM (or this one on a larger wrist, perhaps) might do better. A FB Flex might track this a little more. For my part, I just don't log any burn from strength training; I consider that exertion an unquantified (therefore inedible) "deficit bonus."

On cardio workouts like rowing, recumbent cycling, or (my favorite) adaptive motion trainer, the Fitbit-reported burn is significantly lower than the HRM-reported burn. A Flex might track rowing more than the One does since it's wrist-borne. But the AMT gets the heart going so much, plain old step count and pace are somewhat deceptive. Same thing with running on an incline treadmill - the Fitbit doesn't account for that incline, and it makes a difference. I don't think the Flex has an altimeter at all, so even stepping on inclines and stairs outdoors may be underestimated with the Flex as compared with the One.

So I think it depends on the type of activity you do. If it's mostly step-based, like walking or running, Fitbit excels (I don't bother using my HRM to track a walk or run since the FB accounts for it and is more convenient). If your strategy is incorporating more activity into your daily life, the FB will work better than trying to track all day with an HRM (except maybe the Basis band, which is more to track lifestyle instead of workouts). If you plan to isolate your exercise more and track "workouts" (including walks and runs), especially if your activity is other than step-based, a properly configured HRM may be of more use.

Of course, if you're a tech-toy junkie like me... They can be used together.

I have a One and a Polar FT7.
I wear the Fitbit everywhere (incl gym) but it is useless for things like a stationary bike, rowing machine, strength and of course can't be taken into the pool.
I use the HRM to track all forms of exercise and whilst I am sure it isn't great for strength, it is better than nothing and way better than the Fb.

The FB picks up my entire burn for the day and for that it's perfect and I wouldn't use a HRM for that.

No desire to buy a flex - not sure it would be as accurate as the One for everyday activity and doesn't pick up stairs.

I'm a fan of the Fitbit Flex thus far. I've been using it for approx a week now and I like the fact that it motivates me. It also tracked my runs and although I was guessing I was running approx 3 miles the flex tracked it down to the step it was actually 3.25. Although nothing is perfect I think gadgets such as these are a good way to remind you to move.

I use the Flex the Aria and a HRM to capture data and FitBit ,MyFitnesspal and Cyclemeter to track everything. I have found that the HRM generally gives me a lower calorie burn than most of the cardio exercises in the FB/MFP exercise databases.

So for mountain biking and elliptical cross trainer I use the HRM calories. Just seems logical to use the more conservative number since my goal is weight loss. If I were to use the higher number and it was not accurate I could be fooled into thinking I had burned more calories than I really had and increase my caloric intake inappropriately. I let the Flex take care of general steps, etc.

I started with the One, but was always losing it and it ended up going through the wash. (It actually continued to work, but the battery life seemed to be lower) I can wear the Flex in the pool and in the shower.

Hope this helps

I've been hearing a lot of things about the Polar (this thread and beyond). That might be the next thing to add. I use the Fitbit Flex and it's great to have that data on hand. But with a number of the things I practice, especially martial arts weapons and ukemi (falling and getting back up repeatedly) it doesn't seem to be accurate. How does everyone's experience work out integrating the data between Fitbit, HRM and MFP? Is there a lot of data that has to be added/modified manually, or do you find they work well together?

ukemi (falling and getting back up repeatedly)

Cool--on my way back from my next wine tasting party, I'm just going to tell everyone I'm doing "ukemi".

Which HRM do you use?
And if you are using a HRM and FB, how does FB know which calories to record (HRM or FB) so that it doesn't double dip?

Which HRM do you use?
And if you are using a HRM and FB, how does FB know which calories to record (HRM or FB) so that it doesn't double dip?

yes someone needs to answer this for me otherwise I am going to take by FB back. I use a heartrate monitor for my exercises and just want to use my fitbit for everything else.

So It looks like mfp, fb, and endomondo w/ hrm play very well together. mfp over-rides the readings from fb anytime something from endomondo is recorded and even the fitbit app is updated properly without any double dipping. bravo to all the teams at each company for great communication between each other.

So the Fitbit Flex only calculates calories based on steps? ... does it factor in height, weight, or heart rate?

basically, my question is does the Flex track calories burned by heart rate or is it just step based?