Eargo 5 vs Fortell AI Hearing Aids

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.

The Fortell AI Hearing Aids are a premium prescription behind-the-ear device priced at $6,800, earning an A grade with a SoundScore of 6.0/5 in HearAdvisor lab testing—an exceptional result that places this device at the top of the prescription hearing aid category. Speech performance is where the Fortell AI truly distinguishes itself. Speech in noise scores an outstanding 6.0/5, a full 3.89 points above the category average of 2.11/5—the kind of margin that represents a meaningful difference in challenging listening environments like restaurants or group conversations. Speech in quiet also excels at 4.6/5, sitting 1.20 points above the category average. Music streaming performs strongly at 4.2/5, coming in 1.44 points above average for the category. The device does have a notable limitation: own-voice comfort scores just 1.5/5, falling 1.20 points below the category average. This low absolute score suggests wearers may notice occlusion effects when speaking. Feedback handling is excellent at 4.8/5, essentially matching the category average. Best suited for: Users who prioritize understanding speech in difficult listening situations and value streaming quality, and who can tolerate potential own-voice occlusion. Given the premium price point, buyers should weigh whether the exceptional speech-in-noise performance justifies the investment compared to alternatives like the Oticon Intent or Oticon Zeal, which offer strong performance at lower price points.