`
`EXHIBIT 2002
`
`
`
`PERFORMANCE OF LEADING
`OPTICAL HEART RATE MONITORS
`DURING INTERVAL EXERCISE
`CONDITIONS
`
`Valencell Biometrics Lab
`January 2017
`
`VALENCELL_0001
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Why we test
`
`As a developer of optical heart rate monitor (OHRM) technology, Valencell has a
`critical need to objectively understand how all OHRM technologies in the market,
`not just Valencell’s, perform in all conditions. We want to know how these
`technologies perform, why they perform the way they do, how they work, and under
`what conditions they don’t work. If our technology is not performing to our
`customers’ high standards for accuracy, our business will suffer. Period.
`
`As you will see from the results in this report, Valencell technology is performing at
`the highest levels in the industry.
`
`Valencell Biometrics Lab
`
`We created the Valencell Biometrics Lab to serve not only as a testing ground for
`the latest in biometric wearable technology, but as a check & balance on our
`product development teams to ensure the highest standards. The lab is run by Dr.
`Chris Eschbach, PhD exercise physiologist, and operated by a team of exercise
`scientists who have tested thousands of devices of all types on thousands of test
`subjects over the years.
`
`
`
`
`
`The Lab maintains a rotating pool of nearly 100 volunteers who visit the lab every
`week to participate in testing. The volunteer pool consists of a broad range of ages,
`weights, fitness levels, skin tones, and physiological habitus, which enables
`Valencell to test how devices work across a diverse population of users.
`
`Testing methodology
`
`This particular investigation involved testing several different devices and two of
`those devices in multiple positions on the arm. Subjects included 30 healthy adults
`(15 males and 15 females), ranging in age from 21 to 68. At most 4 devices under
`test were worn by the subject at one time – one on each wrist and arm (forearm or
`upper arm), respectively. All data was compared to the Polar H7 BLE chest strap
`heart rate monitor as a benchmark. Devices were always worn according to the
`
`
`
`2
`
`VALENCELL_0002
`
`
`
`
`manufacturer’s directions, and there was never more than one wrist device worn on
`the same wrist. All subjects performed the same test with all devices: an 8-minute
`indoor dynamic treadmill test, commonly known as the “Valencell Test”:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Over years of testing, the Valencell Test has been shown to identify weaknesses in
`OHRM devices, particularly in tracking changes in heart rate and other biometrics
`caused by varying activity intensity in different intervals.
`
`
`
`Devices tested
`The following devices were tested:
` Valencell’s reference design
` Valencell’s partners’ wrist/arm products
` Leading competitor products
`
`
`Device Placement, Recording & Data Extraction
`
`Wrist Devices
`Subjects wore one wrist device on each arm during testing, and the devices were
`assigned at random to the subject’s dominant and non-dominant sides. All devices
`were put on by the tester to ensure consistency. Placement was approximately one
`finger proximal to the ulnar styloid process. The device was tightened to the point
`where it would not slide when the subject shook their wrist but was not
`uncomfortable or squeezing the arm.
`
`Forearm Devices
`Subjects wore one forearm device on each arm during testing, and the devices
`were assigned at random to the subject’s dominant and non-dominant sides. All
`
`
`
`3
`
`VALENCELL_0003
`
`
`
`
`
`
`devices were put on by the tester to ensure consistency. Placement was
`approximately two fingers distal to the elbow crease and aligned with the radial
`artery. The straps were tightened snuggly to prevent sliding.
`
`Upper Arm Devices
`Subjects wore only one upper arm device at a time because they wore an armband
`with an iPod Touch on the other arm. Devices were assigned at random to the
`subject’s dominant and non-dominant sides. All devices were put on by the tester to
`ensure consistency. Placement was approximately four fingers distal to the
`shoulder joint on the lateral side of the arm, directly on top of the deltoid muscle.
`The straps were tightened snuggly to prevent sliding.
`
`
`
`
`
`Sources of Error
`
` Sweat occasionally caused the devices to slide, even when the test started
`with the proper tightness and fit.
` Due to arm and/or wrist circumference, the devices were in a slightly
`different location and tightness on some participants.
` The Valencell Reference Design at the upper arm had to be lower on the
`arm for several participants.
`
`
`It is also important to note that it is common for the benchmark chest straps to
`experience errors. Valencell has done simultaneous testing with multiple CSHRM
`devices and found that they typically produce results within +/-5% of each other
`anywhere from 95-98% of the time.
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`VALENCELL_0004
`
`
`
`Test Results
`
`Device
`
`Percent of data within
`
`Tests included in data
`
`(body location
`
`)
`
`+/— 5% of chest strap
`
`Valencell reference design
`
`20--
`
`94%
`
`(upper arm)
`
`Commercially available
`
`(upper arm)
`
`Commercially available
`
`(forearm)
`
`Commercially available
`
`(wrist)
`
`92%
`
`90%
`
`89%
`
`20
`
`20
`
`20
`
`Leading Competitor Product
`
`Leading Competitor Product
`
`20--
`19--
`
`82%
`
`79%
`
`(wrist)
`
`Leading Competitor Product
`
`Leading Competitor Product
`
`Leading Competitor Product
`
`77%
`
`65%
`
`64%
`
`20--
`15--
`14--
`20--
`
`Leading Competitor Product
`
`47%
`
`Conclusions
`
`While many different products on the market today claim to monitor heart rate at the
`wrist, there remain significant differences in the accuracy in these OHRM products.
`This research clearly shows the accuracy in these devices varies significantly,
`particularly during interval training that involves numerous changes to the heart rate
`in short periods of time.
`
`Valencell has dedicated significant R&D resources to solving many of the
`challenges with measure biometrics at the wrist and devices powered by Valencell
`technology continue to outperfonn.
`
`VALENCELL_0005
`
`