Apple AirPods Pro 3 vs Eargo 5

The Apple AirPods Pro 3 is a budget-priced OTC hearing aid released in 2025, earning a B grade with a SoundScore of 3.3/5 in our lab testing. At $250, it sits in the most affordable price tier of OTC devices, though its overall sound performance ranks #49 of 65 in the category. This device delivers standout performance in music streaming, scoring a strong 4.3/5—a full 2.38 points above the category average. Feedback handling is equally impressive at 5.0/5, meaning users can expect excellent stability without whistling or squealing during normal use. These strengths make the AirPods Pro 3 particularly appealing for users who prioritize media consumption alongside hearing assistance. However, speech clarity presents a more mixed picture. Speech in quiet scores 2.3/5, falling 0.53 points below the category average. Speech in noise measures 1.8/5, which is above the category average but still low in absolute terms. Own-voice comfort also trails at 1.9/5, sitting 0.61 points below typical OTC performance. The AirPods Pro 3 is best suited for users already invested in the Apple ecosystem who want hearing assistance combined with premium streaming quality. Those prioritizing speech understanding in conversations may want to explore alternatives like the Apple AirPods Pro 2, which scores higher overall at a lower listed price, or the Elehear Beyond at the top of this price range.

The Eargo 5 is a premium-priced OTC hearing aid ($1,450) that earns a B grade with a SoundScore of 3.6/5 in our lab testing. This invisible-in-ear device offers a discreet rechargeable design, though its acoustic performance shows notable strengths and weaknesses compared to alternatives in its price range. In our testing, the Eargo 5 demonstrates solid speech-in-quiet performance at 3.5/5, scoring 0.75 points above the OTC category average. Own-voice comfort also measures above average, which may appeal to users sensitive to occlusion effects. However, speech-in-noise performance is low at 1.4/5, and music streaming scores 0.0/5—significantly below the category average of 1.92/5. Users who prioritize phone streaming or frequently encounter noisy environments should consider these limitations. Feedback handling is strong in absolute terms at 4.2/5, though slightly below the category average of 4.54/5. The device uses closed sleeves for ear coupling in both initial and tuned configurations, with minimal score improvement from tuning (3.6 to 3.7/5). At this price point, competitors like the Lucid Tala (4.63/5) and Audicus Omni 2 (4.61/5) offer substantially higher overall sound performance. Budget-conscious shoppers may also find similar or better sound quality from lower-priced options like the Sony CRE-C10. The Eargo 5 may suit users who prioritize invisible cosmetics and quiet-environment listening over streaming and noise performance.