The battery in my two-year-old first-gen Pixel Watch generally—unless I use GPS and/or LTE data services heavily—lasts 24 hours-plus until it hits the 15%-left Battery Saver threshold. And because sleep quality tracking is particularly important to me, I’ve more or less gotten in the habit of tossing it on the charger right before dinner, for maximum likelihood it’ll then robustly make it through the night. Inevitably, however, once (or more) every week or so, I forget about the charger-at-dinner bit and then, right when I’m planning on hitting the sack, find myself staring at a depleted watch that won’t make it until morning. First world problem. I know. Still…
Therein lies one (of several) of the key motivations behind my recent interest in the rapidly maturing smart ring product category. Such devices typically tout ~1 week (or more) of between-charges operating life, and they also recharge rapidly, courtesy of their diminutive integrated cells. A smart ring also affords flexibility regarding what watches (including traditional ones) I can then variously put on my wrist. And, as noted within my 2025 CES coverage:
This wearable health product category is admittedly more intriguing to me because unlike glasses (or watches, for that matter), rings are less obvious to others, therefore it’s less critical (IMHO, at least) for the wearer to perfectly match them with the rest of the ensemble…plus you have 10 options of where to wear one (that said, does anyone put a ring on their thumb?).
I’ve spent the last few months acquiring and testing smart rings from three leading companies: Oura (the Gen3 Horizon), Ultrahuman (the Ring AIR), and RingConn (the Gen 2). They’re left-to-right on my left-hand index finger in the following photo: that’s my wedding band on the ring finger 
. The results have been interesting, to say the least. I’ll save per-manufacturer and per-product specifics for follow-up write-ups to appear here in the coming months. For now, in the following sections, I’ll share some general comparisons that span multiple-to-all of them.
Judicial Jockeying
An important upfront note: back in April, I learned that Finland-based Oura (the product category’s volume shipment originator, and the current worldwide market leader) had successfully obtained a preliminary ruling from the United States ITC (International Trade Commission) that both China-based RingConn and India-based Ultrahuman had infringed on its patent portfolio. The final ITC judgement, released on Friday, August 22 (three days ago as I write these words) affirmed that earlier ruling, blocking (in coordination with U.S. Customs and Border Protection enforcement) further shipments of both RingConn and Ultrahuman products into the country and, more generally, further sales by either company after a further 60 day review period ending on October 21. There’s one qualifier, apparently: retailers are allowed to continue selling past that point until their warehouse inventories are depleted.
I haven’t seen a formal response yet from RingConn, but Ultrahuman clearly hasn’t given up the fight. It’s already countersued Oura in its home country, also reporting that the disputed patent, which it claims combines existing components in an obvious way that renders it invalid, is being reviewed by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
We welcome the ITC’s recognition of consumer-protective exemptions and its rejection of attempts to block the access of U.S. consumers. Customers can continue purchasing and importing Ring AIR directly from us through October 21, 2025, and at retailers beyond this date.
What’s more, our software application and charging accessories remain fully available, after the Commission rejected Oura’s request to restrict them.
While we respectfully disagree with the Commission’s ruling on U.S. Patent No. 11,868,178, its validity is already under review by the USPTO’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) on the grounds of obviousness.
Public reporting has raised questions about Oura’s business practices, and its reliance on litigation to limit competition.
We are moving forward with confidence — doubling down on compliance while accelerating development of a next-generation ring built on a fundamentally new architecture. As many observers recognize, restricting competition risks fewer choices, higher prices, and slower innovation.
Ultrahuman remains energized by the road ahead, committed to championing consumer choice and pushing the frontier of health technology.
One perhaps-obvious note: the ITC’s actions only affect sales in the United States, not elsewhere. This also isn’t the first time that the ITC has gotten involved in a wearables dispute. Apple Watch owners, for example, may be familiar with the multi-year, ongoing litigation between Apple and Masimo regarding blood oxygen monitoring. Also, more specific to today’s topic, Samsung pre-emptively filed a lawsuit against Oura prior to entering the market with its Galaxy Ring in mid-2024, citing Oura’s claimed litigious history and striving to ensure that Samsung’s product launch wouldn’t be jeopardized by patent infringement lawsuits from Oura.
The lawsuit was eventually dismissed in March, with the judge noting a lack of evidence that Oura ever intended to sue Samsung, but Samsung is now appealing that ruling. And as I noted in recent Google product launch event coverage, this same litigious environment may at least partly explain why both Google/Fitbit and Apple haven’t entered the market…yet, at least.
Sizing prep is essential
Before you buy a smart ring, whatever company’s device you end up selecting, I strongly advise you to first purchase a sizing kit and figure out what size you need on whatever finger you plan to wear it. Sizing varies finger-to-finger and hand-to-hand for every person, first and foremost. Not to mention that if the ring enhances your fitness, leading to weight loss, you’ll probably need to buy a smaller replacement ring eventually—the battery and embedded circuitry preclude the resizing that a jeweler historically would do—hold that thought.
Smart ring sizing can also vary not only from traditional ring measurements’ results, but also from company to company and model to model. My Oura and RingConn rings are both size 11, for example, whereas the Ultrahuman one is a size 10. Sizing kits are inexpensive…usually less than $10, with the purchase price often then applicable as credit against the subsequent smart ring price. And in the RingConn case, the kits are free from the manufacturer’s online store. A sizing kit is upfront money well spent, regardless of the modest-at-worst cost.
Charging options and sometimes-case enhancements
One key differentiator between manufacturers you’ll immediately run into involves charging schemes. Oura and Ultrahuman’s rings leverage close-proximity wireless inductive charging. Both the battery and the entirety of its charging circuitry, including the charging coil, are fully embedded within the ring. RingConn’s approach, conversely, involves magnetized (for proper auto-alignment)-connection contacts both on the ring itself and on the associated charger.
(Ultrahuman inductive charging)
(RingConn conventional contacts-based charging)
I’ve yet to come across any published pros-and-cons positioning on the two approaches, but I have theories. Charging speed doesn’t seem to be one of the factors. Second-gen-and-beyond Google Pixel Watches with physical contacts reportedly recharge faster than my wireless-based predecessor, especially after its firmware update-induced intentional slowdown. Conversely, I didn’t notice any statistically significant charge-speed variance between any of the smart rings I tested. Perhaps their diminutive battery capacities minimize any otherwise evident variances?
What about fluid-intrusion resistance? I could imagine that, in line with its usage with rechargeable electric toothbrushes operated in water exposure-prone environments:
inductive charging might make it possible, or at a minimum, easier from a design standpoint, to achieve higher IP (ingress protection) ratings for smart rings. Conversely, however, there’s a consumer cost-and-convenience factor that favors RingConn’s more traditional approach. I’ve acquired two chargers per smart ring I tested—one for upstairs at my desk, the other in the bathroom—the latter so I can give the ring a quick charge boost while I’m in the shower.
Were I to go down or (heaven forbid) up a size-or-few with an Oura or UltraHuman ring, my existing charger suite would also be rendered useless, since inductive charging requires a size-specific “mount”. RingConn’s approach, on the other hand (bad pun intended), is ring size-agnostic.
Speaking of RingConn, let’s talk about charging cases (and their absence in some cases). The company’s $199 Gen 2 “Air” model comes with the conventional charging dock shown earlier. Conversely, one of the added benefits (along with sleep apnea monitoring) of the $299 Gen 2 version is a battery-inclusive charging case, akin to those used by Bluetooth earbuds:
It’s particularly handy when traveling, since you don’t need to also pack a power cord and wall wart (conventional charger docks can also be purchased separately). Oura-compatible charging cases are, currently at least, only available from (unsanctioned-by-Oura, so use at your own risk) third parties and require a separate Oura-sourced dock.
And as for Ultrahuman, at least as far as I’ve found, there are only docks.
Internal and external form factors
In addition to the aforementioned charging circuitry, there is other integrated-electronics commonality between the various manufacturers’ offerings (leading to the aforementioned patent infringement claim—if you’re Oura—or “obviousness” claim—if you’re Ultrahuman). You’ll find multi-color status LEDs, for example, along with Bluetooth and/or NFC connectivity, accelerometers, body temperature monitoring, and pulse rate (green) and oximetry (red) plus infrared photoplethysmography sensors.
The finger is the preferable location for blood-related monitoring vs the wrist, actually (theoretically at least), thanks to higher comparative aggregate blood flow density. That said, however, sensor placement is particularly critical on the finger, as well as particularly difficult to achieve, due to the ring’s circular and easily rotated form factor.
Most smart rings are more or less round, for style reasons and akin to traditional non-electronic forebears, with some including flatter regions to guide the wearer in achieving ideal on-finger placement alignment. One extreme example is the Heritage version of the Oura Gen3 ring:
with a style-driven flatter frontside compared to its Gen3 Horizon sibling:
Interestingly, at least to me, Oura’s newest Ring 4 only comes in a fully round style:
as well as in an expanded suite of both color and size options, all specifically targeting a growing female audience, which Ultrahuman’s Rare line is also more obviously pursuing (I hadn’t realized this until my recent research, but the smart ring market was initially male-dominated):
The Ring 4 also touts new Smart Sensing technology with 18 optical signal paths (vs 8 in the Gen3) and a broader sensor array. I’m guessing that this enhancement was made in part to counterbalance the degraded-results effects of non-ideal finger placement. To wit, look at the ring interior and you’ll encounter another means by which manufacturers (Oura with the Gen3, as well as RingConn, shown here) include physical prompting to achieve and maintain proper placement: sensor-inclusive “bump” guides on both sides of the backside inside:
Some people apparently find them annoying, judging from Reddit commentary and reviews I’ve read, along with the fact that Ultrahuman rings’ interiors are smooth, as well as the comparable sensor retraction done by Oura on the Ring 4. The bumps don’t bother me (and others); in contrast, in fact, I appreciate their ongoing optimal-placement physical-guidance assistance.
Accuracy, or lack thereof
How did I test all these rings? Thanks for asking. At any point in time, I had one on each index finger, along with my Pixel Watch on my wrist (my middle fingers were also available, along with my right ring finger, but their narrower diameters led to loose fits that I feared would unfairly throw off measurement results).
I rotated through my three-ring inventory both intra- and inter-day, also repeatedly altering which hand’s index finger might have a given manufacturer’s device on it. And I kept ongoing data-point notes to supplement my oft-imperfect memory.
The good news? Cardio- and pulmonary-related data measurements, including sleep-cycle interpretations (which I realize also factor in the accelerometer; keep reading), seemed solid. In the absence of professional medical equipment to compare against, I have no way of knowing whether any of the output data sets (which needed to be viewed on the associated mobile apps, since unlike watches, these widgets don’t have built-in displays…duh…) were accurate. But the fact that they all at least roughly matched each other was reassuring in and of itself.
Step counting was a different matter, however. Two general trends became increasingly apparent as my testing and data collection continued:
- Smart ring step counts closely matched both each other and the Pixel Watch on weekends, but grossly overshot the smart watch’s numbers on weekdays, and
- During the week, whatever ring I had on my right hand’s index finger overshot the step-count numbers accumulated by its left-hand counterpart…consistently.
Before reading on, can you figure out what was going on? Don’t feel bad if you’re stumped; I thank my wife’s intellect (which, I might add, immediately discerned the root cause), not mine (sloth-like and, standalone, unsuccessful), for sorting out the situation. On the weekends, I do a better job of staying away from my computer keyboard; during the week, the smart rings’ accelerometers were counting key presses as steps. And I’m right-handed, therefore leading to additional right-hand movement (and phantom step counts) each time I accessed the trackpad.
By the way, each manufacturer’s app, with varying breadth, depth, and emphasis, not only reports raw data but also interpretations of stress level and the like by combining and analyzing multiple sensors’ outputs. To date, I’ve generally overlooked these additional results nuances, no matter that I’m sure I’d find the machinations of the underlying algorithms fascinating. More to come in the future; for now, with three rings tested, the raw data was overwhelming enough.
Battery life and broader reliability
As I dove into the smart ring product category, I kept coming across mentions of claimed differentiation between their “health” tracking and other wearables’ “fitness” tracking. It turns out that, as documented in at least some cases, smart rings aren’t continuously measuring and logging data coming from a portion of their sensor suites. I haven’t been able to find any info on this from RingConn, whose literature is in general comparatively deficient; I’d welcome reader direction toward published info to bolster my understanding here. That said, the company’s ring was the clear leader of the three, dropping only ~5% of charge per day (impressively translating to nearly 3 weeks of between-charges operating life until the battery is drained).
Oura’s rings only discern heart rate variability (HRV) during sleep (albeit logging the base heart rate more frequently), “to avoid the daytime ‘noise’ that can affect your data and make it harder to interpret”. Blood oxygen (SpO2) sensing also only happens while asleep (I took this photo right after waking up, right before the watch figured out I’d done so and shut off):
Selective, versus continuous, data measurement has likely obvious benefits when it comes to battery life. That said, my Oura ring’s (which, like its RingConn counterpart, I bought already lightly used; keep reading) battery level dropped by an average of ~15% per day.
And Ultrahuman? The first ring I acquired only lasted ~12 hours until drained, and took nearly a day to return to “full”, the apparent result of a firmware update gone awry (unrecoverable in this case, alas). To its credit, the company sent me a replacement ring (and told me to just keep the existing one; stay tuned for a future teardown!). At about that same time, Ultrahuman also added another Oura-reminiscent and battery life-extending operating mode called “Chill” to the app and ring settings, which it also made the default versus the prior-sole “Turbo”:
Chill Mode is designed to intelligently manage power while preserving the accuracy of your health data. It extends your Ring AIR battery life by up to 35% by tracking only what matters, when it matters. Chill Mode uses motion and context-based intelligence to track heart rate and temperature primarily during sleep and rest.
More generally, keep in mind that none of these devices are particularly inexpensive; the RingConn Gen 2 Air is most economical at $199, with the Oura Ring 4 the priciest mainstream option at between $349 and $499, depending on color (and discounting the up-to-$2,200 Ultrahuman Rare…ahem…). A smart ring that lasts a few years while retaining reasonable battery life across inevitable cycle-induced cell degradation is one thing. One that becomes essentially unusable after a few months is conversely problematic from a reputation standpoint.
Total cost, and other factors to consider
Keep in mind, too, that ongoing usage costs may significantly affect the total price you end up paying over a smart ring’s operating life. Ironically, RingConn is not only the least expensive option from an entry-cost standpoint but also over time; although the company offers optional extended warranty coverage for damage, theft, or loss, lifetime support of all health metrics is included at no extra charge.
On the other end of the spectrum is Oura; unless you pay $5.99/month or $69.99/year for a membership (first month free), “you’ll only be able to see your three daily Oura scores (Readiness, Activity, and Sleep), ring battery, basic profile information, app settings, and the Explore content.” Between these spectrum endpoints is Ultrahuman. Like RingConn, it offers extended warranties, this time including (to earlier comments) 2-year “Weight loss insurance”:
Achieved your weight loss goals? We’ll make resizing easy with a free Ultrahuman Ring AIR replacement, redeemable once during your UltrahumanX coverage period.
And, again, as with RingConn, although baseline data collection and reporting are lifetime-included, it also sells a suite of additional-function software plug-ins it calls PowerPlugs.
One final factor to consider, which I continue to find both surprising and baffling, is the fact that none of the three manufacturers I’ve mentioned here seems to support having more than one ring actively associated with an account, therefore, cloud-logging and archiving data, at the same time. To press a second ring into service, you need to manually delete the first one from your account first. The lack of multi-ring support is a frequent cause of complaints on Reddit on elsewhere, from folks who want to accessorize multiple smart rings just as they do with normal rings, varying color and style to match outfits and occasions. And the fiscal benefit to the manufacturers of such support is intuitively obvious, yes?
Looking back, having just crossed through 3,000 words, I’m sure glad I decided to split what was originally envisioned as a single write-up into a multi-post series I’ll try to get the RingConn and Ultrahuman pieces published ahead of that October 21 deadline, for U.S. readers that might want to take the purchase plunge before inventory disappears. And until then, I welcome your thoughts in the comments on what I’ve written thus far!
—Brian Dipert is the Editor-in-Chief of the Edge AI and Vision Alliance, and a Senior Analyst at BDTI and Editor-in-Chief of InsideDSP, the company’s online newsletter.
Related Content
- The Pixel Watch: An Apple alternative with Google’s (and Fitbit’s) personal touch
- The 2025 CES: Safety, Longevity and Interoperability Remain a Mess
- If you made it through the schtick, Google’s latest products were pretty fantastic
- Wireless charging: The state of disunion
The post The Smart Ring: Passing fad, or the next big health-monitoring thing? appeared first on EDN.
