FOREO BEAR 2 vs ZIIP Halo

Disclosure: Glow & Current earns a commission when you buy through links on this page, at no extra cost to you. It does not change which device wins or what we say about it — here is exactly how we are funded, and here is how we evaluate devices.

Buy the ZIIP Halo if you want to know what the device is doing: it is the only one of the two that publishes a current range, 900 nanoamps to 400 microamps, and its four-minute routine is realistically repeatable. Buy the FOREO BEAR 2 if practicality decides it - a sealed, washable silicone body and no proprietary gel - and accept that FOREO publishes no output figure, which makes any comparison on strength impossible.

Quick picks

The short answer

#	Product	Best for	FDA clearance	Price
1	ZIIP Halo Wins on disclosure	anyone who wants a number to compare	Not located	Check price on Amazon #ad How we are funded
2	FOREO BEAR 2 Wins on practicality	a device that lives in a wet bathroom	Not located	Check price on Amazon #ad How we are funded
3	NuFACE TRINITY+ The tiebreaker	published output and a clearance naming the device	Located	Check price on Amazon #ad How we are funded

Prices are checked live and stamped with the date they were read. No live price is held for these listings right now, so every button reads “Check price on Amazon” rather than showing a number we cannot stand behind. Last price check: October 13, 2026.

FOREO's BEAR 2 has a sensor that is described as detecting skin conditions and adjusting current accordingly. That may well be good engineering. It is also unfalsifiable from the outside, because no microamp figure is published for any setting, so there is nothing to adjust from and nothing to compare against.

ZIIP takes the opposite approach and publishes a range that spans three orders of magnitude. It is a brand-stated figure like everything else in this category, but it is a figure, and it lets you place the device against the only other devices that publish one. Why so few brands publish output, and what it means.

In detail

Every pick, and why

Illustrative photograph. Not a picture of this model.

Check price on Amazon

#ad How we are funded

Wins on disclosure

ZIIP Halo

ZIIP Beauty · Best for anyone who wants a number to compare

900 nA to 400 microamps across up to 23 waveform combinations, with a four-minute flagship routine. No clearance located for the Halo; the brand's records are K161484 and K212342.

The app-driven device that runs nanocurrent as well as microcurrent, with a published current range that spans three orders of magnitude.

Specifications

Output	900 nA to 400 microamps across up to 23 waveform combinations
Flagship routine	THE LIFT, 4 minutes
Control	Treatments are pushed from the ZIIP app
Clearance	None located for the Halo; see K161484 and K212342 for the brand

FDA clearance not located

No 510(k) record located for the Halo specifically. ZIIP's cleared devices on file are the ZIIP Device (K161484, 24 February 2017) and ZIIP+ (K212342, 23 September 2021), both product code NFO.

What works

• Publishes an actual current range, including the nanocurrent floor
• The only device here that treats waveform shape as the variable
• Four-minute flagship routine is realistically repeatable

What does not

• No located clearance for this model
• The device is useless without the app and an account
• Conductive gel is proprietary and a continuing cost

Specifications from ZIIP Halo retail specification; FDA 510(k) database query, checked 13 October 2026.

Illustrative photograph. Not a picture of this model.

Check price on Amazon

#ad How we are funded

Wins on practicality

FOREO BEAR 2

FOREO · Best for a device that lives in a wet bathroom

Sealed silicone, fully washable, and it runs on its own gel or a generic conductive gel rather than a proprietary one. FOREO publishes no microamp figure at all, and the located clearance K200803 covers BEAR and BEAR mini, not the BEAR 2 face model.

A silicone-bodied microcurrent device with a sensor that claims to detect and throttle current by skin area.

Specifications

Output	FOREO does not publish a microamp figure
Body	Sealed silicone, fully washable
Clearance	K200803 covers BEAR and BEAR mini; no separate BEAR 2 face record located

FDA clearance not located

FOREO's located clearances cover BEAR and BEAR mini (K200803, 31 July 2020, product code NFO) and BEAR 2 Body (K232242, 13 May 2024). We could not locate a separate record for the face BEAR 2.

What works

• Sealed silicone body is the easiest device here to keep clean
• The brand does hold a located clearance in this product code
• Works with its own gel or a generic conductive gel

What does not

• No published microamp output at all, so it cannot be compared on the one number that matters
• No located clearance for the BEAR 2 face model specifically
• Heavily app-dependent

Specifications from FDA 510(k) database query, applicant FOREO, 13 October 2026, checked 13 October 2026.

Illustrative photograph. Not a picture of this model.

Check price on Amazon

#ad How we are funded

The tiebreaker

NuFACE TRINITY+

NuFACE · Best for published output and a clearance naming the device

Up to 340 microamps published, K201782 for the device, K212947 for the LED attachment, and a two-year warranty. It is the answer when neither device above clears your evidence bar.

The reference microcurrent device: swappable attachments, an app, a published microamp ceiling and the deepest clearance history in the category.

Specifications

Output	Up to 340 microamps; the Boost button adds 25 microamps
Attachments	Facial Trainer, Effective Lip and Eye, Wrinkle Reducer (red LED)
Protocol	5 times a week for 60 days, then 2-3 times a week
Warranty	2 years
Clearance	K201782 device, K212947 Wrinkle Reducer attachment

FDA clearance located

510(k) K201782 (NuFace Trinity Plus Device, cleared 22 January 2021, product code NFO - over-the-counter powered facial toning). The Wrinkle Reducer attachment carries its own clearance, K212947 (2 April 2022, product code OHS).

What works

• Publishes its actual microamp output, which most of this category refuses to do
• Two located clearances, one for the device and one for the LED attachment
• Two-year warranty is the longest here

What does not

• Attachments are sold separately and add up fast
• Needs conductive gel every session, which is a running cost
• The app is a convenience, not a reason to buy

Specifications from NuFACE product page; FDA 510(k) K201782 and K212947, checked 13 October 2026.

Neither device holds a located 510(k) under its own name. FOREO's K200803 covers BEAR and BEAR mini, and K232242 covers the BEAR 2 Body, which is a different product from the face device. ZIIP's K161484 and K212342 cover earlier devices. Both brands are therefore real companies with real regulatory history, and neither has a record naming the device in your basket.

If that matters to you - and for an electrical device used on the face, it reasonably might - the NuFACE TRINITY+ is the device in this category with the cleanest answer. How cleared differs from approved, and why the distinction matters here.

• Cleaning. The BEAR 2 is sealed silicone and goes under a tap. The Halo does not. Over years of gel, that is a real difference.
• Gel cost. The Halo uses a proprietary gel; the BEAR 2 accepts generics. What a substitute gel has to do.
• App dependency. Both lean on an app, but the Halo is inert without one - the treatments live there, not on the device.
• Session length. Four minutes versus a longer guided routine. Over five sessions a week, that gap is what decides whether either device survives the year.

The Halo's four-minute flagship routine is its strongest practical feature. Four minutes is short enough to survive a bad evening, and in a category where most devices end up unused that matters more than any specification either brand publishes.

The BEAR 2's advantage shows up over months rather than minutes. Conductive gel ends up on everything, and a device you can rinse under a tap stays usable in a way a sealed-only-on-paper device does not. It also accepts a generic gel, which quietly removes a recurring cost that the Halo keeps.

Both still demand the same underlying commitment: around five sessions a week to start, then ongoing maintenance, with the effect fading if you stop. What that timeline really looks like.