The biggest weakness of the Apple Watch makes the best case for Apple’s ring

I Apple Watch you have a problem no software update can fix. It’s still the most accurate wearable I’ve tested, but needing to recharge it every day means it’s often stuck on the charger overnight, which is where some of the most important health metrics are collected.

As wearables increasingly compete with long-term health data instead of just fitness stats, battery life is Apple’s biggest weakness. Smart rings like Oura Ring and screen-free bands like Whoop again Fitbit Air they’ve created a niche by doing the opposite of the Apple Watch: disappearing. They stay on your body for a week or more at a time, collecting health trends that the smartwatch misses while it’s sitting on a charge.

I’ve tested a lot of wearables, and I recommend the Apple Watch over other smartwatches because they always come out on top in my heart tests. But despite years of trying, I’ve never been able to wear one to bed every time.

Apple’s smartwatch only takes an hour to charge, but between late-night appointments, kids and an unpredictable schedule, I’ve never had a reliable charging routine before nighttime wear. Sooner or later, I might forget to charge it or forget to put it back before going to sleep. I am not alone. I have spoken to researchersathletes and friends who choose another wearable simply because they can wear it day and night.

Apple is leaving an opportunity on the table. Not because the Apple Watch isn’t good enough, but because it asks too much of those who wear it. A well-designed low-cost wearable like a smart ring compatible with the Apple Watch may be the missing piece.

Battery life is difficult to solve

Accuracy is not just about having better senses. It’s a balancing act between sensor quality, software algorithms and sampling frequency (how well the device measures your material). The Apple Watch is the best of all three. Its optical sensors, algorithms and continuous heart rate sampling during workouts consistently outperform other wearables in my tests. And that’s why the battery drains quickly.

In contrast, smart rings are a completely different design and have their own advantages. Their small batteries mean they take regular samples, which is fine overnight when your values ​​don’t change much, but they’re great for capturing sudden spikes during short training sessions.

In my testing the Oura Ring 5its maximum heart rate during a 3-mile run was 8 beats per minute lower than the chest strap (gold standard), although the average heart rate was about the same. The Apple Watch, by comparison, tracks about the same with the chest strap even at those peaks.

Apple struggles to keep hardware in your hand

Apple’s sensors and software already reveal as much long-term health information as a smart ring. The Vitals app flags signs of illness when one or more health signals are out of range, and tracks menstrual cycles and recovery metrics. The problem is that those details depend on consistent night wear. That means you have to remember to charge it before going to bed, and not accidentally forget the charger (me!).

Apple’s reverse ovulation estimates, for example, require at least five consecutive nights of sleep tracking to obtain a baseline temperature, and two full menstrual cycles of night wear to activate ovulation estimates. And upgrading to a new model or resetting your watch means starting the whole process over.

Compare that to the Oura Ring 5, which lasts a week or more on your finger without interruption before needing a charge. Even if I might forget to wear it the night it charges, I don’t have to reset my foundation. It just picks up where I left off. That means I can see my ovulation data as it happens and not repeatedly like the Apple Watch. As a woman trying to better understand my cycle, that continuity made it so much easier to connect the dots between my hormones, sleep, recovery and exercise.

Can the Apple Watch have its cake and eat it too?

There are battery improvements flowing down the pipeline. Silicon-carbon-based battery technology — which allows for more battery power without increasing its size — could eventually make its way from phones to wearables like the Apple Watch. High-performance processors like Qualcomm’s Snapdragon Wear Elite also promise increased battery benefits for this year’s wearables. Apple uses its own chipsets, but it may be taking notes.

Even those improvements are likely to push the Apple Watch anywhere near the week-long battery life that Garmin is eyeing, smart rings and screenless fitness bands are delivering. At least not anytime soon.

If Apple wants all-week battery life without sacrificing the accuracy of the Apple Watch, it will have to create a new wearable device. The ring may require giving up some workout tracking accuracy compared to the Apple Watch or a thicker, sensor-based band, but for me, it would be a worthwhile sacrifice. Believe me, I don’t need another strap on my wrist.

The winning formula, based on my experience ​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​upon. Although that means buying multiple devices, Samsung already supports combining health data when wearing both The Galaxy Ring again Galaxy Watch. Google also did the same with Fitbit Air, which can be worn in conjunction with Pixel watch.

Legs up, but late in the game

Apple wouldn’t start over with a smart ring. It already has a lot of health infrastructure in place with the Health app, years of biometric algorithms and more than a decade of Apple Watch development. The company has even proven that it can shrink heart rate sensors into a tiny earbud without sacrificing accuracy. In mine test, AirPods Pro 3 surprisingly tracked around the Polar chest strap during exercise, second only to the Apple Watch.

The challenge isn’t whether Apple can build a ring; that it can hold. Oura and Whoop have spent nearly a decade refining not only hardware, but the way people understand their lives. They have transformed complex biometrics, such as heart health, into concepts such as “cardiovascular age” that are easy to understand and implement. Who doesn’t want to steal their heart for a few years?

Oura also owns a significant share of the smart ring market and has never hesitated to go after anyone who comes too close. The company has pursued patent cases against rival Samsung as well Ultrahumanwhich makes it clear to any newcomer that there are high stakes in this game.

I can’t beat them, buy it

If you ever wanted to skip legal drama, skip years of hardware development and quickly find a mature ring platform by purchasing it, Oura would be an obvious target. It’s the same playbook that Google used when it existed found Fitbit in 2019.

The two companies already share more DNA than you might expect. Oura has become a destination for Apple talent, including former Apple hardware executive Brian Lynch, former Apple health leader Ricky Bloomfield and designer Miklu Silvanto, who once worked under Jony Ive.

But it’s not Apple’s style. Historically the company has preferred to build its products from the ground up rather than inventing them right away.

Will we ever get the Apple Ring?

Apple has flirted with the idea of ​​its own smart ring for years, filing patents dating back to 2015 for finger-wearable devices covering everything from biometric sensors and NFC to touch controls for AR headsets. But patents aren’t products, and many designs filed by Apple never see the light of day.

The biggest argument against the Apple ring has always been cannibalism. In October 2024, Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman reported that Apple had no active plans to build one because executives were worried it would eat into Apple Watch sales. And of course, asking people to spend an extra $300 (or more) on a ring on top of the $400 Apple Watch is a lot to ask.

But after testing both, I don’t think they solve the same problem. One wins from workouts, notifications and live metrics. Another is collecting long-term health data from the background. And with the global smart ring market expected to grow from $519 million by 2026 to $3.77 billion by 2034, according to Fortune Business Insights, it’s a segment that’s becoming increasingly difficult to ignore. Apple has already successfully expanded a product category with a small consumer product: the iPod. At one time, there was the iPod Classic, iPod Shuffle and iPod Nano.

Even Gurman has softened his stance. In the mid-2025 Power On newsletter, he argued that Apple should seriously consider a smart ring. And with Apple CEO John Ternuslongtime hardware engineer who helped oversee the Apple Watch, AirPods and Vision Pro, the company may be entering another hardware-focused chapter.

If I had to bet, I’d still say that Apple is doubling down on the Apple Watch sooner rather than introducing a new category. Better batteries, more efficient chips and new health features.

But over time, the ring doesn’t seem so far away. And if my Infinite Loop — my imaginary Apple ring name — becomes a reality, I’ll be first in line.