On all the Facer watch faces I’ve noticed that none of the heartbeats are accurate compared to the watch’s own heartbeat monitor. I have the heartbeat widget set as the first swipe left. So I check it compared to the face and the face is off and it’s not even close. Sometimes, especially during a workout my heart is in the 140s but the face is frozen at 82.
The face heartbeat also seems to update slowly and to random numbers.
All the other functions like, steps, miles, activity, etc work fine.
Also, the standard watch faces that come with the watch through the Wear app and a face I purchased through the Play Store work great with their heartbeat monitor.
I’ve allowed Facer permission to location and phone.
I’m using a Galaxy 4 watch on a Samsung S21.
Is there anything else I’m missing?
Welcome to the Facer.community group !!! @NotDrStrange
This is a group where you can meet designers, programmers, and many good people, who can help you with your questions and ideas that you need …
For now with your question …
Your Heart Rate on your Facer Watch Face is not coming from Samsung Health. So it will be different from the Samsung Apps on your watch. It’s an issue with Galaxy 4 watches that Facer says they’re actively working on a fix with Samsung and Google. Hopefully it won’t be a long wait… Do not lose Faith.
I hope we have been able to help you with your question !!!
enjoy the group
Cordially JDCardozo
Welcome to the Community @NotDrStrange where there’s lots to learn and plenty of helpful people too, one of which being Cardozo, who you can see has already addressed your problem 
Thanks @cardozo198013 
@cardozo198013
Thank you for the reply. I understand but it’s disappointing. There are literally thousands of faces then that are essentially not very useful and drain battery trying to receive a statistic that isn’t achievable.
Trying to find a face without a heartbeat but with some of the other information is difficult.
I hope Facer can get this done. I really like this app.
We’re all in agreement… hope they get it fixed soon! I know it’s an active priority but since it involves Samsung and Google it’s not entirely in Facer’s hands.
I totally understand what you say …
Now I want to show you some designs of mine … with essential information (not having the H Health information) … and with a range of colors of designs …
I think you might like …
Here I show you
Cordially JDCardozo
Thank you @cardozo198013. I like some of your designs. I’ll try some.
I just noticed that steps are also off.
My steps on the face are showing 1404, but Samsung Health is showing 1848, and Google Fit is somewhere in the 1100s.
Are all the health data off on Facer?
yes, all the health data is off on Facer, only with the Galaxy 4 watches. That’s what they’re trying to fix. Has something to do with pulling data from Samsung health I think. But on earlier Tizen samsung watches and on all the other WearOS watches the health data tracks pretty close to whatever is native on the watch. So it’s not exactly a prevailing issue with Facer or all those watchfaces, as much as it’s a bug with the new WearOS and Galaxy 4 specifically in how they are sharing or not sharing data with Facer app. (I think… I only sort-of know what I’m talking about 
)
I dunno about it being just Galaxy 4 watches. My Moto 360 never matches the watch health data. Sometimes its just out by a couple hundred steps, other times its a lot more. I don’t know the actually details, but I came to my own conclusion that Facer doesn’t actually use the watch health data, it counts its own. As I understand it, WearOS will use a combination of data from your watch and phone to come up with stats. If I’m right, and Facer counts its own, then its not going to match. It’s one of the reasons I usually use a ,000 step scale on my watch faces.
Gotta be honest here, if that’s true, and Facer doesn’t use Samsung Health or GFit data then it diminishes the usefulness of this app. Most of the faces on here have health data. Since I got a fitbit I’ve wanted health data on my watch. I switch to the Galaxy 3 because it tracked data better. I figured the 4 would be even better.
I did find a face that is simple with digital time, seconds, and power without any health data for now. It’s fantastic on battery life and will do the job right now.
Assuming this a temporary issue I’ll stick with Facer. Hopefully it is.
I guess the health data on wear OS based health apps will never match data on facer watch faces, since they do not share them, but each is collecting them on their own.
Again, its only a guess on my part - it would be nice if Facer would address it. I wouldn’t be surprised if it were something to do with permissions and possibly personal data sharing. I wonder if other apps have the same issue - like for example FitBit data.
I’m not sure if it diminishes its usefulness. Who’s to say Google’s data is more accurate? As I said, I think that they use a combination of data from a step count, possibly GPS distance data and watch data. I don’t know what it does, but if its a combination, then its clearly a guess, in which case, none of it is particularly accurate. What does it matter? Do you lose a pound in weight if you did 10,000 steps today, but nothing if you only did 9,999?
I use a treadmill quite often. My mileage covered differs between my watch (Google Fit) and the treadmill. So does calories burned. Which is more accurate? Does it matter? Having goals and targets is great, but the accuracy is not going to mean the difference between success and failure. If you’re looking for consistency, use one unit of measure and stick with it.
@richiebee Well, when it comes to the heartbeat function accuracy matters wouldn’t you say?
As for step count, calories, activities, etc I don’t disagree that it doesn’t necessarily matter where the data is pulled as long as it’s consistent. But that’s inherently the problem.
No one knows where it’s coming from or how it’s being recorded. If Facer said, “we have our own tech that calculates this info”. Fine.
But for all we know it’s just random numbers on a screen.
I have found a way to get “accurate” step count, but not heart rate. Customizable complications (Facer Premium only I believe), take the step info from the Google data. Interestingly, there is no complication for heart rate. Even if I choose a face that came with my watch (ie, not on facer at all), I can’t add a heart rate custom complication. That tells me that the issue is not actually Facer in that regard. For the step count, if I add a custom complication, plus a standard step count complication onto the same face, they don’t show the same stats. The custom complication matches exactly, what Google Fit tells me.
The watch faces that come with the watch have accurate heartbeat functionality. Also a watchface I got directly from Google Play, AWF New Digital 2, has a heartbeat complication that works.
I really like that face and would still be using it except it eats battery like a starving animal.
So this is definitely a Facer problem.
more accurately, it’s a 3rd party app problem. It’s a solution that requires cooperation from Samsung and Google. If you had any other watch than a Samsung WearOS 3 watch it wouldn’t be a problem. The exact same faces on other makes of watches show HR and Steps data pretty similar to the native watch data. Close enough to be practical imo. There are a lot of variables in counting steps. Who’s to say at the end of a day if Google fit’s reported 8500 or Facer’s reported 8250 is absolute.
As a designer, I’m annoyed that the issue exists. If I had a GW4 I’d be annoyed even more probably. But either way, I’m assuming it’s a priority for Facer to get it fixed, and since it’s not a problem that’s really their fault, I’m willing to be patient while they get it sorted out.
Oh, I completely agree about that. Who is to say that Google’s count v Samsung’s is completely accurate. My issue is we have no idea where Facer is getting their number.
And it seems to update randomly and not be anywhere near the numbers of the others. So I’d like to know if it’s their own count or something.
Or at least give a choice in the settings if they want that data pulled from Google, Samsung, or counted their way. But I guess that’s the problem…
Plus, it’s not the steps that matter to me as much as the heartbeat tbh.
If you had any other watch than a Samsung WearOS 3 watch it wouldn’t be a problem.
Not so. Mine is a Moto 360 (3rd Gen). It’s WearOS. Facer does not show fitness data that matches the Fit app.
how big is the discrepancy that you see at the end of the day? I’d say what I notice on my various WearOS watches is Facer steps and native steps are within about 4 or 5% of each other which I don’t consider a problem. Is it worse than that on the Motorola? I wish that Facer could tap into Google Fit to be completely synced. I don’t know the ins and outs of why that isn’t apparently possible.
8 or 9%? I don’t know. It really varies. But as I mentioned above, if you set up a “customizable complication” inside facer, then it reports it exactly correctly. So, I can have two step counts on the same watch face, one using a customizable complication, and one using the #ZSC# tag, and they’re way off from each other. Of course, customizable complications have their own issues, which is presumably why hardly anyone uses them in their designs.