Apple's changes to the Watch lineup mean there is no budget option this year.

      **TL;DR** Mark Gurman reports that Apple is currently in the late stages of testing three models of the Apple Watch for this fall, none of which include an SE version. There won't be a design refresh, and it will debut the first new chip since 2023. Apple seems to be stepping back from the budget watch market as Google introduces the $99 Fitbit Air while other screenless competitors are gaining traction in the health sector.

      According to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman, Apple is in the late stages of testing three Apple Watch models for this autumn: the Series 12 available in Wi-Fi and cellular variants, along with the Ultra 4. There are no plans for a new Apple Watch SE in 2026. The absence of the SE model is newsworthy since it was integral in making the Apple Watch accessible at a competitive price.

      What will be released instead is that neither the Series 12 nor the Ultra 4 will undergo a redesign. The enhancements will be internal, including the introduction of the first new chip since 2023 to break a performance freeze spanning three generations, along with improvements focused on health and fitness features.

      Apple is also developing wrist-based blood pressure monitoring; however, the challenge lies in obtaining regulatory approval rather than the sensor technology itself. Blood sugar detection, a project initiated during Steve Jobs' tenure, remains aimed for a rollout later this decade. A significant overhaul is in progress but will not be ready for another year or two.

      If we look at it simply, 2026 will bring a chip upgrade and a health update on a design that's been around for five years, while the entry-level model is quietly absent. This approach seems unusual given the increasing competition Apple faces.

      The Apple Watch, which has been in existence for 11 years, is losing traction, with competitors like Whoop, Oura, and Google's Fitbit Air carving out substantial markets with screenless bands and rings that emphasize recovery and sleep.

      Eliminating the SE model creates a problematic gap at this crucial moment. Google has introduced the Fitbit Air at a price of $99 and has paired it with a health coach from Gemini, while Whoop has begun offering consultations with licensed clinicians.

      Apple has previously exited lower-end markets profitably; it disrupted the mid-tier watch segment and is now targeting eyewear. Thus, this move to leave the budget segment could be a strategic decision rather than a mistake. However, the danger lies in the fact that health tracking, a key growth area, is effectively served by the $99 bands now available.

      Internally, the Watch is also losing its standing within Apple's own product lineup. Accuracy tests show that the heart rate monitoring capabilities of AirPods Pro 3 are nearly on par with the Apple Watch. This raises the question of the necessity of having a device specifically on the wrist.

      With earbuds managing heart rate and rings tracking sleep, the Apple Watch must find new grounds to justify its existence. Blood pressure monitoring could provide that differentiation, but it requires clearances that Apple has not yet secured.

      In the broader context for September, the Apple Watch represents a small fraction of what Gurman describes as the widest range of new devices that Apple has ever introduced, with an event anticipated on September 8 or 9. The iPhone 18 Pro and Pro Max are set to take the lead.

      Apple's first foldable iPhone is also expected to launch around the same time, likely beginning at a price point of $2,000, placing it directly in competition with Samsung's Galaxy Z Fold.

      Across the board, prices are expected to rise. Gurman anticipates increases of $100 to $200 for the new iPhones due to chip shortages and camera components.

      In summary, Apple is increasing prices at the high end while withdrawing from the lower end in the same cycle. For the iPhone, where switching costs are significant, this strategy seems justifiable. However, for a watch that competes with $99 bands and $200 rings, and with a redesign not expected for another two years, this strategy is more challenging to rationalize.