This could be a great app!
This is one of the most visually appealing fitness apps I’ve used!
The interface is clean, modern, colorful, and does an excellent job presenting workout data. I also appreciate how much information is available—from training load and endurance fitness to heart rate zones and workout trends.
My biggest criticism is that the app often assumes users already understand advanced exercise physiology.
For example, labels like “Low Aerobic Shortage,” “High Aerobic,” and “Anaerobic” are presented without enough explanation of how the app defines those terms. During one of my indoor walking workouts, the app classified 67% of the session as anaerobic, which seemed surprising for a steady 50-minute walk. Whether the app is correct or not isn’t really the issue—the issue is that it never explains why it reached that conclusion.
I would love to see each metric include a brief explanation answering three simple questions:
• What does this metric measure?
• Why did I receive this result?
• What can I do to improve it?
Even something as simple as a tappable “Learn More” button beneath each chart would dramatically improve the experience. The app already excels at collecting and displaying data; now it needs to excel at helping users understand what that data means.
Overall, this is one of the most promising fitness apps I’ve tried. With clearer explanations and more educational context, I think it could become one of the best fitness platforms available.
The interface is clean, modern, colorful, and does an excellent job presenting workout data. I also appreciate how much information is available—from training load and endurance fitness to heart rate zones and workout trends.
My biggest criticism is that the app often assumes users already understand advanced exercise physiology.
For example, labels like “Low Aerobic Shortage,” “High Aerobic,” and “Anaerobic” are presented without enough explanation of how the app defines those terms. During one of my indoor walking workouts, the app classified 67% of the session as anaerobic, which seemed surprising for a steady 50-minute walk. Whether the app is correct or not isn’t really the issue—the issue is that it never explains why it reached that conclusion.
I would love to see each metric include a brief explanation answering three simple questions:
• What does this metric measure?
• Why did I receive this result?
• What can I do to improve it?
Even something as simple as a tappable “Learn More” button beneath each chart would dramatically improve the experience. The app already excels at collecting and displaying data; now it needs to excel at helping users understand what that data means.
Overall, this is one of the most promising fitness apps I’ve tried. With clearer explanations and more educational context, I think it could become one of the best fitness platforms available.
Show more
More features and google health integration
Missing lot of features like strain, recovery, sleep score and stress details important one Google health and fit but air integration. Also need weight body metric standards.
Nice app and modern interface
Waiting for it to mature now
Grundsätzlich super Idee
Anfangs fand ich die App wirklich super. Mittlerweile habe ich festgestellt, dass die Daten aber nicht stimmen. Die Herzfrequenz im Schlaf sowie die Herzfrequenzvariabilität stimmen nie mit den tatsächlichen Daten im Handy überein und werden jedes Mal schlechter dargestellt wie sie eigentlich sind.
Mittlerweile leider ein Grund, die App zu deinstallieren.
Mittlerweile leider ein Grund, die App zu deinstallieren.
Show more
Rlly good
Gives great insights on training load sleep etc even on the free plan much simpler to use then the health app
