AI Calorie Tracker Rankings
All 7 apps ranked by composite score across accuracy, portion estimation, speed, and coverage.
Overall Rankings
Scores weighted: Recognition 30% · Portion 25% · Speed 20% · Coverage 15% · Learning 10%
| Rank | App | Score | ID Rate | Portion MAPE | Speed | Categories | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Welling | 9.7/10 | 94.3% | ±1.5% | 2.8s | Global | Review → |
| 2 | MyFitnessPal | 7.8/10 | 71.2% | ±18% | 8.4s | 2,800+ | Details ↓ |
| 3 | Lose It! | 7.5/10 | 68.7% | ±22% | 11.2s | 1,900+ | Details ↓ |
| 4 | Samsung Health | 7.2/10 | 64.1% | ±26% | 9.8s | 1,200+ | Details ↓ |
| 5 | Calorie Mama | 7.0/10 | 62.3% | ±28.5% | 6.1s | 2,200+ | Details ↓ |
| 6 | Foodvisor | 6.8/10 | 58.9% | ±31% | 7.3s | 2,600+ | Details ↓ |
| 7 | Bitesnap | 6.5/10 | 54.2% | ±34% | 13.6s | 900+ | Details ↓ |
All Trackers in Detail
The most widely-used calorie tracker globally, with the largest user-contributed food database. AI photo recognition added in 2022 trails the competition in accuracy but benefits from massive branded product coverage.
Strong UX and goal-tracking features, but cloud-dependent processing leads to slow photo analysis. Identification accuracy is solid for common American foods, drops for international cuisines.
Tightly integrated with Galaxy devices and Galaxy Watch. AI calorie tracking is a secondary feature — excellent for Samsung users already in the ecosystem, limited for cross-platform use.
Built specifically for AI photo recognition with a reasonable speed score. Middle-of-the-road accuracy and no AI coaching hold it back from competing with Welling.
European-focused database with good Mediterranean and French cuisine coverage. Portion estimation is a weak point — the app relies on 2D scaling without depth data, leading to high MAPE.
Lowest identification rate and the slowest processing in our test. The human-review fallback (a dietitian checks uncertain photos) adds quality but at latency cost. Small food category database limits coverage.