Why do both score low despite a 200-gauss figure?

Because 200 gauss is a momentary peak, sometimes only reachable with coils stacked, not the sustained field at a stated frequency. We do not credit a peak headline as the operating spec, so both are capped; they rank on programmability, waveform disclosure, and value.

PEMF · Compare

FlexPulse G2 vs ICES DigiCeutical A9

Neither publishes a sustained field at a stated frequency, so neither earns the field dimension, but the FlexPulse edges it: a disclosed waveform plus a full frequency table is more transparency than a fixed protocol with no stated frequency, and it earns the partial waveform credit. Both are candid, lower-cost local devices.

Both are small, portable two-coil devices, and both headline a 200-gauss peak, so both are capped on field spec. The separator is disclosure. The FlexPulse publishes a full per-program frequency table (3 to 999 Hz) and a named trapezoidal waveform; the A9 documents its burst waveform but states no clean operating frequency for its fixed auto-protocol.

FlexPulse G2

3.0

Limited

ICES DigiCeutical A9

2.6

Limited

$849	Price	$449
20000 µT peak (not a spec)	Field spec	20000 µT peak (not a spec)
3-999 Hz	Frequency	not stated
disclosed	Waveform	disclosed
none claimed	FDA	none claimed
targeted coil	Format	targeted coil

Score breakdown

2.0	Verified Field Spec30%	0.0
2.0	Regulatory Honesty20%	2.0
8.0	Frequency & Programmability15%	3.0
5.0	Coverage & Applicators15%	5.0
0.0	Value20%	5.0

FAQ

Why do both score low despite a 200-gauss figure?: Because 200 gauss is a momentary peak, sometimes only reachable with coils stacked, not the sustained field at a stated frequency. We do not credit a peak headline as the operating spec, so both are capped; they rank on programmability, waveform disclosure, and value.