The Best GPS Running Watches

GPS running watches are a significant upgrade from fitness trackers: In addition to counting steps and measuring distance, GPS watches provide a range of advanced training metrics.

We’ve determined that the reliable Coros Pace 3—with its fast GPS connectivity and outstanding battery life—is the best option for most runners.

If you’re looking for more smartwatch-like features than the Pace 3 offers, we’ve found that the Garmin Forerunner 165 and Garmin Forerunner 165 Music provide the best overall value in the Garmin lineup. For beginners, the Forerunner 45 is a simple yet dependable choice.

Coros Pace watches are praised for their long battery life, quick GPS, and accurate tracking. The Coros Pace 3 builds on these strengths, adding dual-frequency GPS and music storage, all without a big price increase.

Its standout upgrade is better GPS, now connecting to up to five satellites for improved accuracy in remote areas or dense cities. During our tests in New York City, the Pace 3 locked onto GPS signals faster than any other watch.

It also has the best battery life of our picks. While it features a color touchscreen, it lacks AMOLED, so the display isn’t as vibrant as on higher-end models.

The Garmin Forerunner 165 joins the popular GPS watch lineup, featuring an AMOLED touchscreen at $200 less than the Forerunner 265s. It lacks some advanced training features but provides key metrics like running power and cadence. GPS signal acquisition is decent but slower than the Coros Pace 3. For $50 more, the 165 Music version adds music storage and streaming.

For GPS watch beginners, the Garmin Forerunner 45 is a solid choice if you don’t need a touchscreen and can tolerate slower signal acquisition. It offers reliable GPS and accurate distance tracking but has fewer activity modes. The heart-rate monitor can be less accurate during intense workouts, and it lacks swim tracking, music storage, and an AMOLED screen.

Who this is for

A GPS running watch is an essential tool for runners who want to enhance their training and track their mileage, especially for those running races or tackling long-distance events like half-marathons and marathons.

“The benefit of a GPS watch is that it allows you to track trends over time,” explained physical therapist Bryan Heiderscheit, director of the UW Health Sports Medicine Runners Clinic. “It provides motivation to collect data, review your performance, and share it with your community.”

In this guide, I’ve focused on both serious road racers and novice runners looking to elevate their training with more specific data than a basic fitness tracker provides.

Using a heart-rate-enabled GPS watch to record your stats offers several advantages over relying on a smartphone app—or worse, tracking nothing at all. Many GPS watches allow you to set lap markers and record start/stop times with a simple button press.

They also provide quick access to essential metrics such as distance, time, pace, and heart rate, plus features like navigation, saved maps, and location sharing. Most models sync with a companion app or website, allowing you to log your runs and analyze your progress to adjust your training accordingly.

Many GPS watches also track other activities like swimming and cycling, but for this review, I focused on how they perform during runs.

That said, GPS isn’t perfect. Environmental factors like trees and tall buildings can impact signal strength, and while watchmakers use multiple satellite networks and high-refresh rates to minimize errors, no watch can guarantee perfect accuracy, especially for instant-pace readings during a run.

The latest models also include all-day activity tracking, sleep tracking, and additional smartwatch features like music streaming or storage, text-message replies, notifications, calendar alerts, and third-party app syncing.

How we picked and tested

I chose not to test watches designed for mountaineering or trail running, as these offer similar features to running watches but with added navigation tools and sensors for elevation tracking.

In our latest evaluation of running watches, conducted over three months of daily use, I focused on the following criteria:

Ease of use and wearability: I considered button layouts, display brightness, menu navigation, weight, strap comfort, and touchscreen responsiveness (when applicable).

Battery life: I compared each watch’s advertised battery life to its performance after two full days of use.

Distance measurement with GPS and indoor tracking: To test accuracy, I ran on an outdoor track, in Central Park, and along the Prospect Park path in Brooklyn. I also tested treadmill accuracy for indoor distances. I also noted GPS signal acquisition times in varied environments such as Midtown Manhattan, rural Vermont, and the Jersey Shore, aiming to identify any significant delays (most watches found a signal in under 15 seconds).

Heart rate and daily activity tracking: During a series of treadmill runs and a 5k on an outdoor track, I compared the heart-rate readings of each watch against a Polar H10 chest strap monitor.

Apps: I downloaded the companion apps for each watch and assessed how well data was organized, the usefulness of customized workouts or feedback, access to maps, and app layout.

What we didn’t track: I paid less attention to cadence, VO2 max estimates, and calorie counts, as experts have noted these metrics can often be inaccurate or arbitrary.

Our pick: Coros Pace 3

The Coros Pace 3 offers premium running features at a reasonable price. It includes dual-frequency GPS and boasts one of the longest battery lives in its class.

The watch features a color touchscreen, which, while not AMOLED like the Garmin Forerunner 165, offers a clear, customizable display that can show metrics such as step count and heart rate.

A new addition to the Pace series, the touchscreen can be toggled on or off in the settings. During runs, I found it more convenient to use the wheel button on the right side to scroll through key stats like pace, lap time, heart rate, and distance.

With a simple press of the wheel button, you can also view a log of recent workouts.

The Coros Pace 3 boasts an impressive battery life. Upon release, it was advertised to last up to 24 days in non-GPS mode. In my testing, after two days of regular use—including one GPS run and one without—it was at 92%, coming close to the stated battery life.

After a firmware update that added a daily stress feature, Coros stated the Pace 3 would last 17 days due to changes in update rates. However, turning off these features allows you to approach the full 24-day battery life. Even after nearly a year of use, I noticed no significant drop in battery performance.

Before a run, the watch displays a battery-life meter showing how many hours are remaining.

In accuracy, the Pace 3 performs well. During a 1-mile test, it was off by just -0.03 miles, with only the Apple Watch Ultra outperforming it by -0.02 miles.

In regular runs on a 1.58-mile loop in Central Park, the Pace 3 was consistently accurate, never deviating by more than 0.1 miles. If the signal weakens, a satellite icon appears.

The heart-rate monitor was within +/-5 beats per minute of a Polar H10 chest sensor 70% of the time.

At just 1.06 ounces, the Pace 3 is lightweight and comfortable.

It also comes with a two-year warranty.

Flaws but not dealbreakers

The Pace 3’s screen isn’t as vibrant as other watches, lacking an AMOLED display, so colors can appear dim in low-light settings. It also lacks an automatic shutdown button, requiring a manual power-on by holding the bottom right button.

The white nylon Velcro strap is comfortable but shows discoloration over time from sweat and dirt, though it can be washed. The silicone strap, however, shows less wear.

Runner-up: Garmin Forerunner 165

The Garmin Forerunner 165 is a stylish and reliable GPS running watch. It offers a crisp touchscreen and solid performance but has a shorter battery life compared to our top pick, the Coros Pace 3, and takes longer to acquire a signal. Unlike our top choice, it lacks built-in music storage (available on the Forerunner 165 Music for an additional $50), but it still provides a great experience for Garmin enthusiasts. With an AMOLED screen and optional music storage, the Forerunner 165 offers features previously found only on higher-priced models. While it sacrifices some advanced metrics, it’s a strong choice for most runners.

The GPS connection is dependable. During the initial few runs with the watch, I noticed that the Forerunner 165 took a bit longer to establish a signal compared to the Coros Pace 3. However, this issue resolved itself over time, and the watch connected quickly, even in race environments, surrounded by large crowds and poor cell reception.

Its accuracy is consistently reliable: One tester completed two half-marathons (approximately 13.1 miles), which measured 13.32 miles and 13.26 miles, respectively.

The watch is intuitive and customizable. Thanks to the Forerunner 165’s responsive and clear touchscreen, adjusting the layout is simple. You can easily add quick-access shortcuts for workouts like treadmill sessions and stairs, or monitor your heart rate.

Both the Forerunner 165 and Forerunner 165 Music are backed by a one-year warranty.

Flaws but not dealbreakers

The Forerunner 165’s battery life is shorter than our top pick, lasting 11 days compared to the Coros Pace 3’s 17 days. In our two-day test, it had 80% remaining, indicating it would last around 10 days. It charges quickly and should provide a week of use. For music control, you’ll need the Forerunner 165 Music, which has 4 GB of storage, similar to the Coros Pace 3.

For a GPS running watch that covers the essentials but doesn’t offer much more, the Garmin Forerunner 45 is a solid choice.

It’s a more basic version compared to the Forerunner 100- and 200-series, with fewer customization options. However, it tracks runs accurately and is easy to use.

While it has good accuracy, its battery life is shorter. In our tests, its heart-rate and distance tracking were slightly less precise than our other picks, but nothing was significantly off. The listed battery life is seven days (with a shorter duration in GPS mode). After two days of continuous use, it had 70% remaining and lasted as advertised.

It still offers more than a typical fitness tracker. Although it lacks features like training readiness scores found in other Garmin models, it can track non-running activities like cycling and yoga. It also has a heart-rate monitor, though it was somewhat inconsistent during intense exercise.

Flaws but not dealbreakers

It’s a bit glitchier than our other picks. Testers encountered some issues with the Forerunner 45, such as occasional disconnections from phones, requiring a restart of the watch to reconnect.

It lacks some extras. There’s no onboard music storage or playback, and without a touchscreen, the design feels a bit dated.

The Forerunner 45 comes with a one-year warranty.