Ardent Pulse Track review: the most accurate GPS we have measured, wrapped in mediocrity
1.4 metres of drift on a measured track is a category-leading number. Everything built around that chipset is average, and the app is worse.
The verdict
Good, with caveats
Worth buying if the compromises below suit you.
Ardent bought a positioning company in 2023 and the Pulse Track is what that purchase bought: 1.4 metres of average drift over 25 track laps, which is the best figure we have recorded at any price. Everything else is unremarkable. The optical heart rate lags a chest strap by nine seconds on intervals, the battery is mid-pack, and the app requires an account and deletes your history if you close it. If GPS accuracy is your problem, this solves it. If it is not, this is a $399 watch doing $250 of work.
- Buy it if
- You run trails, cities, or anywhere with unreliable signal, and route accuracy actually changes your training.
- Skip it if
- You do interval work off wrist heart rate, or you want a watch that also behaves like a smartwatch.
Tested for seven weeks, 240 miles, and 25 measured track laps. Bought at retail with our own money. How we test
Pros and cons
Pros
- Best GPS accuracy we have measured, by a wide margin
- Multi-band positioning holds up in cities and under tree cover
- 10 ATM rating and a screen that has taken a knock without marking
- Physical buttons that work with wet or gloved hands
Cons
- Optical heart rate is nine seconds behind a chest strap on intervals
- The app requires an account and does not store data locally
- Data export is behind a subscription
- No offline maps at this price
Almost every GPS watch is accurate enough on an open road. The differences appear where the signal does not: between buildings, under trees, and on a track, where the true distance is known to the centimetre and the watch has nowhere to hide.
- 1.4m
- Average drift, 400 m track
- 9s
- Heart rate lag on intervals
- 26h
- Multi-band GPS battery
Class average: 6.2 m
The track test
Twenty-five laps of a certified 400 m track in lane one, watch on the left wrist, compared against the known distance. Then the same watch through a city loop with tall buildings on both sides, and a wooded trail section under full canopy.
| Test | Result | Class average |
|---|---|---|
| Track drift, average | 1.4 m | 6.2 m |
| Track distance error | 0.3% | 1.4% |
| Urban drift, average | 3.8 m | 11.9 m |
| Wooded drift, average | 4.1 m | 9.7 m |
| Time to first fix | 4 s | 9 s |
25 laps of a certified 400 m track, plus 5 km urban and 5 km wooded loops, repeated three times. Reference is the mean of five multi-band watches between $350 and $600.
These are the best positioning numbers we have recorded, and not marginally. A 0.3% distance error over a session means a marathon measured to within 130 metres, which is inside the variation caused by your own running line.
Heart rate, which is the other half of a running watch
Steady state is fine — within 2 bpm of a chest strap for the whole of a 45-minute easy run. Intervals are not. On 400 m repeats the optical sensor takes about nine seconds to catch a rise and about the same to catch the fall, which means the number on your wrist describes the previous repetition.
The app
Ardent requires an account before the watch will finish setup. Activity history is stored on Ardent’s servers rather than on the phone; deleting the app removes local access to everything. Exporting your own data in a standard format is part of a $4.99 monthly tier.
We would score this harshly on any product. On a $399 one it is difficult to justify, and it is the single reason we cannot recommend the Pulse Track to someone who is not specifically buying it for the positioning.
Battery and build
Twenty-six hours with multi-band GPS active, eleven days as a watch. Both are mid-pack and both matched the claims. At 47 g with the supplied strap it disappears on the wrist, and after seven weeks including one hard contact with a doorframe the screen is unmarked.
The verdict
A specialist instrument sold as a general-purpose watch. If you run where GPS struggles, nothing else comes close. If you do not, you are paying $399 for a chipset you will never notice and an app you will resent.
How it scored
Weighted average of 6 criteria
- GPS accuracy9.826%
1.4 m average drift on a measured 400 m track over 25 laps.
- Heart rate6.021%
Excellent at steady state, nine seconds behind on intervals.
- Battery7.516%
26 hours of multi-band GPS, 11 days in watch mode. Mid-pack.
- Software and app5.216%
Account required, history stored server-side, exports are a paid tier.
- Build and comfort8.011%
47 g, comfortable, and the screen survived a wall.
- Value6.511%
One outstanding component in an otherwise ordinary product.
Overall7.4/10
Specifications
Positioning
| Constellations | GPS, Galileo, BeiDou, QZSS |
|---|---|
| Bands | L1 and L5 multi-band |
| Track drift, measured | 1.4 m average over 25 laps |
Sensors
| Heart rate | Optical, 5 LED |
|---|---|
| Interval lag vs chest strap | 9 seconds |
| Other | Barometric altimeter, compass |
Battery and build
| Battery, multi-band GPS | 26 hours measured |
|---|---|
| Battery, watch mode | 11 days measured |
| Weight | 47 g with strap |
| Water resistance | 10 ATM |
Where to buy the Pulse Track
- Ardent StoreCheck price for the Pulse Track at Ardent Store (opens in a new tab)
- Pace OutfittersCheck price for the Pulse Track at Pace Outfitters (opens in a new tab)
We earn a commission when you buy through these links. It never changes what we recommend, and we buy every unit we test. How we stay independent.








