Athlytic vs Livity

Recovery: the same two inputs, framed differently

Both apps build the morning number from the same two inputs — heart rate variability and resting heart rate. Athlytic expresses it as a Recovery percentage and pairs it with a Target Exertion range on a 0–10 scale, so the score comes with a budget for the day. Livity expresses it as a Recovery Score and pairs it with 24/7 cardiovascular load monitoring and daily exertion targets. Functionally, you get the same instruction: push or don't.

Where they differ is how much of the method each will tell you. Athlytic's help centre spells out the reference point: it takes "a rolling, 60-day average of both metrics as a baseline and compare[s] them to the current day's readings to generate your Recovery score", it "weights HRV slightly higher than RHR", and a score of 50% means you are sitting on your own baseline rather than on some population norm. Livity publishes nothing equivalent — "advanced HRV and resting heart rate analysis" is as specific as its copy gets. Neither publishes the actual formula, and neither publishes a validation study.

That window also decides how long each app takes to become useful, and both are honest about it. Athlytic: "There's no calibration period required, unless you've been wearing your Apple Watch for less than 60 days. In that case, Athlytic will continue refining your insights until it has a full 60 days of data for the most accurate results." Livity's FAQ quotes a much shorter warm-up, but only for one metric: "Some scores (like Body Battery) need 3–5 days to calibrate."

If you want to understand what the underlying signal actually is before you trust either score, our explainer on HRV and longevity covers what heart rate variability measures and what it does not.

The age number: Athlytic Age vs Livity Fitness Age

This is the feature most people are actually comparing, and the two apps handle it quite differently.

Livity is the more forthcoming of the two. It calls its output Fitness Age, describes it in its own App Store copy as "your biological fitness age vs. chronological age", and publishes the eight metrics behind it: VO2 max, resting heart rate, HRV, sleep duration, daily steps, moderate activity, vigorous activity and strength training. It also keeps a separate "pace of aging" metric — "how fast you're aging biologically compared to chronologically", which its manual says is inspired by "DunedinPACE research methodology" — and its Fitness Age manual names the literature behind each input, including Kokkinos 2022 (JACC) on VO2 max, Zhang 2016 (CMAJ) on resting heart rate and Paluch 2022 (Lancet Public Health) on daily steps. We did not independently check those citations.

One Livity gotcha worth knowing before you compare screenshots with a friend: the FAQ notes the number depends on your chosen heart-rate-zone method, because "each HR-zone method uses a different formula, so switching methods changes your zone minutes and the resulting age".

Athlytic is more cautious with its language. Its metric is Athlytic Age, described as showing "how your daily habits and training are shaping your body's true rate of aging—whether you're trending younger, older, or right on track". Notably, the phrase "biological age" does not appear on any Athlytic page we fetched. Its release notes name some components — weekly Zone 2 and Zone 4+ minutes, heart rate recovery ("Heart Rate Recovery has been added as an additional component of Athlytic Age"), and weighted views ordered by "RHR, Body Fat, Steps, and more" — but not the full model. The Beta tag came off the feature in version 26.5.0.

What neither app gives you is a formula you can audit, or a study validating its own output. Livity's citations are evidence for the ingredients — that VO2 max and resting heart rate predict mortality — not evidence that Livity's particular recipe turns them into a meaningful age. Two proprietary models fed the same wrist data will disagree, and that disagreement is the model, not your body. If you want the background before reading too much into either number, start with what biological age actually means and why VO2 max carries so much of the signal.

Wearables: the real fork in the road

If you own an Apple Watch and nothing else, this section does not apply to you and both apps are fine. If you own anything else, it decides the comparison.

Athlytic takes everything through Apple Health. Its own help-centre article, "Garmin, Oura, and Third-Party Wearables", is unusually honest about the consequences: any device that syncs to Apple Health should technically work, but most third-party wearables do not sync correctly or in real time. Garmin users are pointed at third-party workarounds for full workout data and for HRV; Oura can be set as your preferred sleep tracker but writes sleep to Apple Health without writing HRV — one of the two inputs the Recovery score is built on. The article's conclusion is that Athlytic works best with an Apple Watch. Its release notes do add Hume as a sleep tracker.

Livity names its sources. Its FAQ confirms a direct Garmin integration under Profile → Integrations → Garmin, and a Fitbit route under Profile → Integrations → Google Health, which "pulls in Fitbit sleep, heart rate, steps, workouts and more". Sleep itself comes through Apple Health — "you need a device writing sleep there" — and where a device does not export to Apple Health at all, the FAQ says "your Apple Watch (or Garmin/Fitbit) is the more complete source". Its App Store release notes also advertise connecting an Oura Ring for sleep, readiness and activity.

The caveat: those two Livity statements do not fully agree. The FAQ says that for Oura, Ultrahuman, Whoop and Amazfit, "Livity works through Apple Health rather than connecting to those apps directly", while the 5.0 release notes say "Connect your Oura Ring to bring sleep, readiness, and activity into Livity". Garmin and Google Health are the two clearly documented direct integrations; treat the Oura path as unconfirmed until Livity says the same thing in both places, and do not assume direct Whoop support at all.

Pricing: one published price versus a wall of SKUs

Athlytic publishes the same number in both places. The US App Store lists Athlytic Pro at $4.99/month and $29.99/year; athlyticapp.com says "$29.99 / year or $4.99 / month" under a heading that reads "ONE PLAN. THAT'S IT.", then "7-day free trial. No lifetime unlocks, no discount games — one fair price from a two-person team". You know what you are signing up for before you download.

Livity publishes no prices on its website at all. Its FAQ says there is a 3-day free trial and that plans are "monthly, annual, and a one-time Lifetime purchase — current pricing shows in the app's paywall". Its App Store in-app purchase list is not much help either. Checked on 2026-07-30 it ran to weekly entries at $3.99 and $4.99, monthly at $9.99 (one of them named "Livity PRO Monthly (Deprecated)"), yearly at $59.99 and $79.99, and a "Health & Sleep Tracker - Pro" entry at $249.99 — with several names repeated at different prices. Treat that as a range, not a menu: Apple caps how many purchases a listing displays and the set it shows is neither complete nor stable. Which plan you are actually offered, and which entry is the Lifetime purchase, is not published anywhere. The paywall in the app is the only authoritative answer.

Every figure above is a 2026-07-29–30 snapshot of the US storefront, read off the two App Store listings and athlyticapp.com. Both apps ship often and Livity's SKU list is visibly in flux, so check the listing yourself before you decide anything on price. Older numbers for both apps are still in circulation elsewhere and no longer match.

Livity vs Athlytic: the short version

Coming at it from the Livity side: Livity does more things, discloses more about its Fitness Age, and is the only one of the two that will talk to a Garmin without a workaround. What it will not tell you is what it costs until you are inside the app, and it has a fraction of Athlytic's rating history.

Athlytic does fewer things and does them with more polish, more Apple-ecosystem surface area, a clearer price and a longer trial. If your wrist has an Apple Watch on it and you want one number each morning, that trade is a good one. If your wrist has something else on it, Livity is the pragmatic answer.

Neither is a bad app. This is genuinely a "which shape fits your kit" decision, not a winner-and-loser one.

If it is the age number you are actually after

Full disclosure, since it would be daft to pretend otherwise: we make a third app, so weigh this accordingly.

Both Athlytic and Livity produce an age as a by-product of a readiness tracker — the daily score is the product, the age sits further down the screen. Sarvita is built the other way round. Biological age is the output, split into VO2 Max Age, HRV Age and Body Composition Age, and the coaching exists to move it: Sar reads the same Apple Health data and turns it into a weekly plan across the four pillars of longevity training.

What it will not give you is Athlytic's 24/7 out-of-range alerting or Livity's blood-pressure log. If a granular daily readiness score is the thing you want, one of those two is the better buy — genuinely. If you want to know whether this year of training actually moved your ageing, that is the question we built for. The head-to-heads are here: Sarvita vs Athlytic and Sarvita vs Livity.