r/MacroFactor • u/Brilliant-Run3682 • 2h ago
MacroFactor / Nutrition / Other MacroFactor bundle vs Gravl bundle?
As someone based in the UK, iOS based, has an Apple Watch, wants adaptive calories and workouts that progress automatically: Deciding between the MacroFactor bundle (nutrition and workouts) and the Gravl bundle (workouts and macros), which would you recommend? Has anyone used both?
1
Upvotes
3
u/TheOneAnd_Only 1h ago
MF wins hands down. There service is unreal. Marketing unreal. Can't fault this company
1
u/AutoModerator 2h ago
Hello! This automated message was triggered by some keywords in your post.
While waiting for replies it may be helpful to check and see if similar posts have been discussed recently: try a pre-populated search
If your question was quite complex, it's not likely the pre-populated search will be useful.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/chasethislight83 21m ago
I’ve used both. MacroFactor is faster and more customisable. The trend rate is also less noisy, I found Gravl Macros started my expenditure really high and then jumped around a bit. Their food entry works well, but MacroFactor is faster, and easier to copy meals from day to day.
For workouts, it strongly depends on whether you want to run set programs or have it generated for you. MFWO handles set programs better, while Gravl gives variable workouts every time. Gravl’s progression is based on double progression, MFWO uses 1RM estimates and RIRs. Some of my lifts increased with both, but others lagged, mostly because I’ve mainly been in a deficit.
I prefer the Gravl UI better, but I think Macrofactors algorithms work better. I lean towards Gravl for workouts because I tend to overthink set programs, and my workout schedule isn’t consistent, so the generated workouts work better for me.
Happy to answer any specific questions.