Everyone wants it. If you walk into any Apple Store today and ask about Apple Watch glucose monitoring, the staff will probably give you a polite, practiced smile and point you toward the Series 10 or the Ultra 2 heart rate sensors. But they won’t sell you a watch that pokes your skin or reads your blood sugar through a laser. Not yet. It’s the "holy grail" of wearable tech. It’s also incredibly hard to do.
Honestly, the rumor mill has been spinning for a decade. We’ve heard about "Project E5" since the days of Steve Jobs. The idea is simple: use lasers to shine light through your skin, measure the reflected light, and calculate glucose levels without a single drop of blood. No needles. No expensive monthly sensors. Just a watch.
But science is stubborn.
The Reality of Apple Watch Glucose Monitoring Right Now
Let’s be real. If you see an ad on Instagram for a $50 "smartwatch" that claims to monitor blood sugar via a green light on the back, it is a lie. Period. Those devices are basically guessing based on heart rate or just spitting out random numbers. They are dangerous for diabetics. Apple knows this. That’s why they haven't released it yet.
Apple is reportedly using a technology called silicon photonics and a process known as optical absorption spectroscopy. Basically, they use a chip that shoots specific wavelengths of light into the interstitial fluid (the stuff between your cells). Glucose absorbs that light in a very specific way. By measuring what comes back, the watch tries to "see" your sugar levels.
The problem? Humans are messy. We sweat. We move. Our skin thickness varies. Even a slight shift in how the watch sits on your wrist can throw the data into chaos.
Who is actually working on this?
It’s not just a bunch of engineers in Cupertino. Apple has a secret group called the Exploratory Design Group (XDG). They operate like a startup within the giant corporation. According to Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman, who has been tracking this for years, the project is finally at a "proof of concept" stage. They’ve managed to shrink the hardware from the size of a tabletop to the size of an iPhone. Now, they just have to get it into a watch case without the battery exploding or the sensor failing.
✨ Don't miss: When were iPhones invented and why the answer is actually complicated
It’s a massive engineering hurdle. Think about it. A Dexcom G7 or a FreeStyle Libre 3 uses a physical filament that actually goes into your body. It sits in your fluid. It’s direct. Apple is trying to do the same thing from the outside, through layers of skin and hair and tattoos.
The Current Workaround: CGM Integration
If you bought an Apple Watch today specifically for glucose, you aren't totally out of luck. You just have to use a "middleman."
The Apple Watch glucose monitoring experience today is really just a very fancy display for a third-party Continuous Glucose Monitor (CGM). If you wear a Dexcom G6 or G7, the sensor sends data to your iPhone via Bluetooth, and the iPhone pushes it to your watch face. Recently, Dexcom even launched "Direct to Apple Watch" in certain regions, which lets the sensor talk to the watch without needing the phone nearby.
It feels seamless. You glance at your wrist during a workout and see a "112 mg/dL" with a steady arrow. It’s life-changing for Type 1 diabetics. But it’s not what people mean when they talk about "Apple's glucose watch." They want the sensor built-in.
Why the FDA is the biggest hurdle
The FDA doesn't play around. For Apple to market this as a medical tool, it has to be incredibly accurate. If the watch says you are at 100 but you are actually at 60 (a dangerous low), it could be fatal.
There’s a measurement called the MARD (Mean Absolute Relative Difference). Most medical-grade CGMs have a MARD under 10%. For a non-invasive laser sensor to hit that? It’s a nightmare. Apple’s current goal might not even be for diabetics at first. It’s more likely they will target "pre-diabetics"—people who just need to know if their sugar is trending high after a soda, rather than people who need to dose insulin based on the reading.
🔗 Read more: Why Everyone Is Talking About the Gun Switch 3D Print and Why It Matters Now
The Competition is Heating Up
Apple isn't alone in this race. Samsung is breathing down their neck. At the 2024 Samsung Unpacked event, they teased the Galaxy Ring, and there’s constant chatter about their own non-invasive research. Then you have companies like Rockley Photonics. They actually went public and worked with Apple in the past, developing "clinic-on-the-wrist" sensors.
Even specialized startups like Know Labs are trying to use radio frequencies instead of lasers. They have a device called the KnowU that they claim can track glucose non-invasively. They are currently in the middle of clinical trials.
But honestly? None of them are in a consumer watch yet.
What This Means for Your Next Purchase
Should you wait for the Series 11 or Series 12? Probably not for this specific feature. Experts like Dr. David Klonoff, medical director of the Diabetes Research Institute at Mills-Peninsula Medical Center, have noted that while the tech is closer than ever, "non-invasive" usually means "less accurate" in the early stages.
If you are a marathon runner or a biohacker who wants to see how a bagel affects your energy, you might be the first target audience. If you have Type 1 diabetes, the current needle-based CGMs are going to be the gold standard for at least another 3 to 5 years.
The "Tattoo" Problem
Here is a weird detail nobody talks about: tattoos. Dark ink in the skin blocks the light sensors used for heart rate and blood oxygen. If Apple uses lasers for glucose, people with "sleeves" or wrist tattoos might be completely unable to use the feature. It’s one of those small, annoying human variables that makes universal tech so difficult to build.
💡 You might also like: How to Log Off Gmail: The Simple Fixes for Your Privacy Panic
Actionable Steps for Tracking Glucose on Apple Watch Today
Since the built-in sensor isn't here yet, here is how you actually do it in 2026.
Get a Prescription for a CGM
If you have a medical need, talk to your doctor about a Dexcom G7 or a FreeStyle Libre 3. These are the only ways to get real-time, accurate data on your wrist.
Use the Health App Properly
Apple’s Health app is actually a powerhouse. Even if you use a manual finger-prick meter (like an OneTouch Verio), make sure it’s synced to your phone. The Apple Watch can then show your "last recorded" reading in a complication on your watch face.
Watch for the "Direct to Watch" Feature
If you already use a CGM, check your settings. Dexcom G7 users can now bypass the phone entirely. This is huge for swimmers or runners who don't want to carry a bulky phone but need to stay safe.
Ignore the Cheap Knockoffs
Seriously. Do not buy a $40 watch from a random website that promises glucose monitoring. They are glorified pedometers. If the tech was that cheap and easy, Apple and Samsung wouldn't be spending billions of dollars trying to solve it.
The tech is coming. We are closer than we were in 2015. But for now, Apple Watch glucose monitoring remains a software-and-syncing game, not a hardware reality. Keep your eye on the "Special Projects" leaks, but keep your finger-prick kit close by for now.
Next Steps for Better Health Tracking:
- Check Compatibility: Open your CGM app (Dexcom/Libre) and look for the "Direct to Watch" or "Watch Mirroring" settings.
- Set Glucose Alerts: Configure your Apple Watch to "Mirror iPhone" for critical alerts so your wrist vibrates when you hit a high or low.
- Log Manually: If you don't have a CGM, use a third-party app like SugarSense or MySugr to manually log your readings; these integrate beautifully with Apple Watch complications for quick viewing.