Find the best product and price, effortlessly.
Discover deals on the best products
Jaybird Freedom F5 (2016) vs KZ ZS3
Jaybird Freedom F5 (2016)
The KZ ZS3 makes for a mediocre Canal Earphone and should be avoided by the majority of people.
In the case of the Jaybird Freedom F5 (2016), however, we were unable to find enough data to come to any meaningful conclusions.
If you're still interested in reading more about the KZ ZS3, however, here's a quick summary of what we know about it:
The reviewers at Head-fi have featured the KZ ZS3 in their KZ-ZS3 Hifi High-End 3.5mm In-Ear Earphone Headphones Earpiece Original Headset Bass Earbuds With Microphone review roundup. However, it fell short of making it to the top of their list.
As for the Jaybird Freedom F5 (2016), it was really well-received by reviewers at Rtings, a reliable source that's known for conducting its own, high-quality, in-depth testing. It performed great in its "The 2 Best Jaybird Headphones of 2021" roundup and was named its "Best Budget Jaybird Earbuds", which, on its own, makes it a product that warrants a closer look.
When we thoroughly analyzed their review scores, we learned that all of the sources that tested both Canal Earphones, including Head-fi, preferred the KZ ZS3 over the Jaybird Freedom F5 (2016).
We also took a look at which sources they managed to impress the most. The KZ ZS3 was liked best by Head-fi, which gave it a score of 9, while the Jaybird Freedom F5 (2016) got its highest, 8.7, score from Runnerclick.
Lastly, we averaged out all of the reviews scores that we could find on these two products and compared them to other Canal Earphones on the market. We learned that both of them performed far better than most of their competitors - the overall review average earned by Canal Earphones being 7.4 out of 10, whereas the KZ ZS3 and Jaybird Freedom F5 (2016) managed averages of 9.0 and 8.2 points, respectively.
Due to the difference in their prices, however, it's important to keep in mind that a direct KZ ZS3 vs. Jaybird Freedom F5 (2016) comparison might not be entirely fair - some sources don't take value for money into account when assigning their scores and therefore have a tendency to rate more premium products better.