HRV on Vertical

Swaddy61

@Egika Crikey… Should I be worried (19ms)? Or get it professionally measured?

A Former User

@Swaddy61 A single value means absolutely nothing (what’s your range?), and comparing people’s HRV values is totally meaningless.

mikekoski490

@Swaddy61 Hi. I’ve brought this same topic up in the Suunto Race forum, as my HRV is totally not correct in Suunto Race.

Since I’ve owned it, my nightly HRV score is around 15, which I was about to go to my doctor to discuss as it’s dangerously low.

Background: I’m 55, ex elite athlete in rowing and cycling, still compete in trail running, overnight resting HR is 48, and Suunto App is currently saying ready for training etc. BP is typically 120/80.

As I have a Polar H10 strap, before going to the doctor, I decided to cross reference a few HRV apps - Elite HRV and HRV4training.

BOTH apps, when paired with my Polar band, gave consistent readings over 2 days between 50 and 60 HRV score.

So, if your Vertical is giving you scary HRV scores, try a Bluetooth heart rate belt and an HRV app.

Personally I think this is a Suunto watch and Suunto app error when the app says my HRV score, at 14 this morning, is ‘normal’,when most online info says that score would mean I’m at risk for catastrophic illness or even death.

My HRV score this morning with Elite HRV was 52.

A Former User

@Miš-Kan I think people with very low HRV have usually a “worse” lifestyle, don’t do much sports, so there’s a higher risk of any health issues in general. That’s logical. But the conclusion of this study was:

Lower HRV was associated with higher risk of incident stroke among middle-aged adults with prevalent diabetes mellitus but not among people without diabetes mellitus.

Ketoohs

@tomasbartko I believe that on this forum, most of us are in above average shape, so seeing low HRV scores is a bit puzzling.

At age 44 my minimum HR at night is mostly around 43, VO2 on the watch above 53 so constant scores of around 32 for the HRV ring all sort of bells in my head. Maybe it is genetics, maybe I am to stressed or maybe the algorithm on the watch just does not work for me.

Jacobus

Hello all,
I am 57 years old and exercise 4-5 times a week, run a sub 4 hour marathon at my leisure, but only have a very low score of 13ms on average…
I usually feel good, full of energy. But I find the HRV value a bit disturbing now that I see yours.
I take all the wisdom that comes from the internet with a grain of salt, but it doesn’t sit well with me.
Be sure to call the doctor for clarity.

Frederick Rochette

I’m 49 years old and have a fairly low heart rate (under 40 beats at rest). HRV analysis works well for me and gives me information that’s fairly consistent with my state of fitness and lifestyle.
The problem is that the data is not identical between SA and Vertical.

pilleus

With the Vertical I never reached a value over 29. Regarding the range or delta of different nights the low values change as in every other app measuring the hrv.

My average hrv value is 42 over the years (63 years old, not lazy, captured with Garmin Connect).

To interprete the different values with different watches and apps you must know the scenery behind the measuring of the heart rate and the used algorithms.

I think this information is not available in Suunto’s strategy to display the nightly average of the hrv.

I attach two pictures of my hrv (last night, pic 1 Garmin Forerunner, pic 2 TicWatch 5 Pro and project Stila). You can see a similar progression of the measured values. The absolute values are different. But in both graphs I get an average value of 37 ms, which is a bit low as usual after yesterday’s hike in the snow. Although the absolute values are higher in the second graph.

In the third image (project Stila), the properties of the measured values from picture 2 (last night) are broken down, which shows how complicated the evaluation actually is.

Ultimately, it is just an indication that, in addition to your own feeling, can provide an indication of the scope and intensity of the upcoming training. I wouldn’t overestimate that.

Marton Attila

Hi, I’m 34 years old. My average heart rate when I’m sleeping sits at 55-60 and minimum 53-55.
This is my HRV range 52-55 recorded for over 2 weeks. I think it works well if you compare values to the HR when sleeping.

The lower your heart rate when sleeping the higher your HRV. I’ve seen 100ms + HRV these guys are machines very fit athletes. It’s as simple as it is. For average peep like me this is it.

@Frederick-Rochette said in HRV on Vertical:

I’m 49 years old and have a fairly low heart rate (under 40 beats at rest). HRV analysis works well for me and gives me information that’s fairly consistent with my state of fitness and lifestyle.

Jesus Christ! Your HRV it’s ridiculously high for you age. Congrats!

Frederick Rochette

@Marton-Attila Thanks! I rarely stay on my sofa

Ivan De Rasis

@Marton-Attila la mia ha una media di 41 MS…com’è??

isazi

This reminds me the Whoop reddit channel, people comparing their HRV as it was something that should be the same for everyone.

Higher is (generally) better, but each person has a different baseline (therefore the reason to compare to your own baseline and not a fixed value), and it is not something that can be trained indefinitely, it has a genetic component.

Now the people that see very low values and have checked with other devices that do exactly the same (average over sleep tracked time), with both devices recording the same amount of sleep too, may have found that one device works better for them then the other, something that OHR is very prone to due to technology. For me Vertical/Race/S9PP and Oura ring give the same sleep HRV, plus or minus a couple of milliseconds.

A Former User

@isazi said in HRV on Vertical:

This reminds me the Whoop reddit channel, people comparing their HRV as it was something that should be the same for everyone.

A Former User

@Marton-Attila well also “regular” people can have high HRV, it’s also genetics. My girlfriend has a HRV of about 90 and she’s not a super trained athlete. Her resting HR is super low though. So it is highly individual. Imho it makes no sense to compare it with others, or even “table values”. What matters are trends over time for each individual. Just my two cents

Marton Attila

@isazi I have literally 0 (zero) interest in any HRV competition. I don’t know why or how I made you believe that. It’s just a random screenshot to show that HRV on this watch really works well for me considering my fitness/level condition. That’s all.

And I agree on everything else you just said! I’m not that black and white more like gradient, haha!

Stefan Kersting

Yes a lot is individual. When skiing with my buddies they are laughing at me because of my high max HR. I am 47 and when pushing myself I can have a HR of 194 (measured with belt). I was litt worried about that because usually you calculate max HR = 220-age. And that does not work for me. I read something about that this formula is not up to date any more and so I was less worried about my HR. I think it is the same with the HRV.

isazi

@Marton-Attila was a general comment after reading for a while, nothing about you in particular, sorry if I made you feel that way

A Former User

@Stefan-Kersting welcome to the club. I have a quite high HR and when I played soccer I measured over 200 a few times, with belt, but until today I am not sure if that was really true, or just a glitch will never know I guess.

Stefan Kersting

@tomasbartko do not know if 194 was true, but it was not urealistic either. In any case, even it is some prosent wrong the HR does not fit in the formula

A Former User

@tomasbartko I hope you are doing the right heart stress checks. In the past I have had episodes of tachycardia on exertion only to find that I had minor problems and was suggested me to quit mountain running. only god knows how much I ran with the holter…