Eargo 8 vs Fortell AI Hearing Aids

The Eargo 8 is a premium-priced OTC hearing aid ($2,399) that earns a B grade with a SoundScore of 3.3/5 in our lab testing. This invisible-in-ear device represents Eargo's 2025 flagship offering, featuring a rechargeable design that sits completely within the ear canal. In our testing, the Eargo 8 showed mixed performance across key metrics. Speech clarity in quiet environments is a relative strength, scoring 0.27 points above the OTC category average. Own-voice comfort also performs well, measuring 0.69 points above average at 3.2/5—a solid result that suggests reduced occlusion effects during conversation. However, speech understanding in noisy environments scored 1.2/5, which is both low in absolute terms and 0.27 points below the category average. The most significant limitation we measured was music streaming, which scored 0.0/5—nearly 2 points below the OTC average. This makes the Eargo 8 unsuitable for users who prioritize streaming audio quality. Feedback handling is strong in absolute terms at 4.2/5, though slightly below the category average. At its premium price point, the Eargo 8 faces stiff competition. Several devices in our database deliver comparable or better sound performance at lower prices, including alternatives from Eargo's own lineup. The Eargo 8 is best suited for users who prioritize invisible cosmetics and own-voice comfort over streaming capability and value, and who primarily need help hearing 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.