EarCentric EX2 vs Eargo 5

The EarCentric EX2 is a behind-the-ear prescription hearing aid priced at $218, positioning it as a budget-friendly option in the prescription category. In HearAdvisor's lab testing, it earned a C grade with a SoundScore of 2.7/5, ranking #35 of 39 prescription hearing aids tested. This 2021 release demonstrates mixed performance across key metrics. Its standout strength is feedback handling, scoring an excellent 4.7/5—essentially matching the category average and indicating reliable stability during movement. However, speech performance is a significant weakness: speech in quiet scores just 1.0/5 (2.40 points below the category average of 3.40), and speech in noise scores 1.0/5 (1.11 points below average). These low absolute scores suggest limited audibility enhancement in our standardized test conditions. Own-voice comfort scores 2.3/5, which is mixed in absolute terms and 0.40 points below the category average. Music streaming scored 0.0/5, indicating this device is not suited for audio entertainment purposes. The EarCentric EX2 may appeal to budget-conscious consumers who prioritize cost over performance, but alternatives exist at similar or lower price points with stronger test results. The RxEars Rxi, available in the same price range, scored 4.07/5 in our testing. Consumers seeking entry-level amplification should weigh the significant speech clarity limitations against the low purchase price.

The Eargo 5 is a premium-priced OTC hearing aid ($1,450) featuring an invisible-in-ear design with rechargeable batteries. In our lab testing, it earned a B grade with a SoundScore of 3.6/5, placing it in the top 52% of the OTC hearing aid category. This device demonstrates solid performance for speech understanding in quiet environments, scoring 3.5/5—0.75 points above the category average of 2.79/5. Own-voice comfort also measures above average at 2.8/5 (+0.29 vs category), though this remains mixed in absolute terms. Feedback handling is strong at 4.2/5, providing reliable stability during wear. However, the Eargo 5 shows notable limitations in other areas. Speech in noise performance is low at 1.4/5, slightly below the category average. Most significantly, music streaming scored 0.0/5, falling 1.92 points below the category average—this device does not support audio streaming functionality. The invisible-in-ear form factor appeals to users prioritizing discretion, and the closed sleeve coupling remains consistent between initial and tuned fits. Tuning provided modest improvement, moving from a normalized Initial Score of 3.5/5 to a Tuned Score of 3.7/5. Given its premium price point, consumers may want to compare against alternatives like the Sony CRE-C10 or Nuance Audio Glasses, which offer similar or better sound performance at lower price points. The Eargo 5 is best suited for users who prioritize cosmetic discretion and primarily need help with speech in quieter settings.