NuFACE Against ZIIP Halo, an Outside Comparison
Medically reviewed by
4 independent reviewers
Andrew Conrad Barile, PT, DPT
Doctor of Physical Therapy (DPT) | Licensed Physical Therapist (PT) | CEO and Founder, Xtreem Pulse LLC
Read bio
Dr. Andrew Conrad Barile is a Doctor of Physical Therapy and the CEO and Founder of Xtreem Pulse LLC, the engineering company behind PureLift. He earned his Doctorate in Physical Therapy from Daemen College and is a licensed physical therapist.
He brings over two decades of clinical and entrepreneurial experience across physical therapy, craniosacral therapy and medical device innovation, built on a working knowledge of human anatomy and muscle physiology.
For PureLift LAB he reviews how current is delivered across all ten levels, from sub-sensory nanocurrent and skin-level microcurrent to motor-level EMS, and how the Infuse pass fits into the same ten-minute routine.
Bertica M. Rubio, M.D.
Board-Certified Physician, Dartmouth Medical School | Medical Director, Antiaging Regenerative Medicine Clinic
Read bio
Dr. Bertica M. Rubio is a board-certified physician and Medical Director of the Antiaging Regenerative Medicine Clinic in Redlands, California. She earned her Doctor of Medicine from Dartmouth Medical School and completed her pediatrics residency at UC Irvine Medical Center.
With decades of clinical experience, she specialises in age management medicine, regenerative medicine, wound healing and growth factor therapies, and her practice integrates evidence-based medical science with advanced aesthetic treatment.
For PureLift LAB she reviews articles for medical accuracy across the whole dial, from the gentle nanocurrent and microcurrent settings through to muscle-level EMS and the Infuse pass.
Daniel Grinberg, MD, FACS
Board-Certified Otolaryngologist | Head and Neck Surgeon | Fellow, American College of Surgeons | Mount Sinai
Read bio
Daniel Grinberg, MD, FACS is a board-certified otolaryngologist and head and neck surgeon at ENT and Allergy Associates in West Nyack, New York. He earned his medical degree from Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons.
He completed his otolaryngology residency at New York University Medical Center, serves as Assistant Clinical Professor at Mount Sinai School of Medicine, and is a Fellow of both the American College of Surgeons and the American Academy of Otolaryngology.
For PureLift LAB he brings a wider clinical lens, connecting at-home facial stimulation from microcurrent to EMS to the anatomy underneath, with the same rigour we apply to every device specification.
Prof. Dr. med. Ivo Buschmann
Chair of Angiology, Medizinische Hochschule Brandenburg | Clinic Director, University Clinic for Angiology
Read bio
Prof. Dr. med. Ivo Buschmann is Chair of Angiology at the Medizinische Hochschule Brandenburg Theodor Fontane and Clinic Director of the University Clinic for Angiology at the Brandenburg University Hospital.
He trained at the University of Hamburg, was a Max Planck Society Fellow at the Max Planck Institute for Heart and Lung Research, and held senior consultant posts at the Charite Universitatsmedizin Berlin before his appointment as Chair in 2016.
One of Europe's leading authorities on arteriogenesis, with over 150 peer-reviewed publications and US and EU patents, he reviews for PureLift LAB how the evidence on electrical stimulation is read and where its limits lie.
Share
NuFACE is the simpler device with the deeper clearance history, ZIIP is the app-led one with the broader treatment library, and their published outputs are close enough to be functionally equivalent.
This article compares the two on what decides the result you actually see, such as:
- what each brand actually publishes about output
- the gel cost underneath both devices
- how much of ZIIP depends on the app
- which clearances cover which model
- who each device genuinely suits
and many more!
We make a competing device and are not in this comparison, which is the point of it.
Key Points:
NuFACE files 335 microamps with the FDA for the MINI+, with no load stated; ZIIP publishes 309 microamps for the Halo.
Both figures sit in the same band, below the level at which a facial muscle contracts.
NuFACE gel runs $35 to $80 a bottle and its FDA file lists a conductive gel primer as a special requirement; ZIIP gels run $29.99 to $79.99.
ZIIP is app-dependent by design, with treatments delivered through the phone; NuFACE works without one.
NuFACE Trinity+ is $395, ZIIP Halo is $399.99, and the MINI+ at $175 to $250 is the cheapest way into either brand.
Why we are writing this
We sell a facial device and we are not one of the two in this comparison, which is unusual enough to be worth stating at the top.
Both of these brands have more search presence than we do, both are frequently shortlisted against each other, and the only people writing the comparison at the moment are the two companies involved.
So the figures below are taken from each brand's own material and from their FDA filings, and where a brand does not publish something, we say so rather than filling the gap.
Our own devices appear once, at the end, and you can skip that part without losing the comparison.
What each one publishes
NuFACE does not publish an output figure on its product pages. The number appears in its FDA submission for the MINI+, which gives a maximum of 335 microamps and a range from 70 to 335, with a modulated square biphasic waveform and a default treatment frequency around 8.3 Hz. No load is stated anywhere, which limits how far the figure can be compared.
ZIIP publishes 309 microamps for the Halo, which is unusual in this category and worth crediting, though it also arrives without a stated load.
The two figures are close, and both sit in the microcurrent band. Ward and colleagues described the thresholds separating sub-sensory, sensory and motor current, and neither of these devices approaches the third.
So anyone choosing between them on strength is choosing between 309 and 335 microamps, a difference you are unlikely to perceive and which neither company has characterised at a stated resistance.
The app question
ZIIP is built around its application. Treatments are selected in the phone and pushed to the device, and the library of guided treatments is the core of what the brand sells.
For some people that is the entire appeal, since it removes the guesswork about where to move the probe and for how long. For others it is friction: a download, an account, updates, and a phone that has to be charged and nearby.
NuFACE has an app as well, and the device works without it, which is a meaningful difference in day-to-day use.
Neither approach is wrong. If you already know you will not open an app four times a week, that is a decision made for you.
Running costs
NuFACE's FDA file for the MINI+ lists a conductive gel primer under special requirements, and the gel holds its own clearance, so the pairing is designed in rather than suggested. Aqua Gel Activator runs $35 for 1.69 oz, $55 for 3.3 oz and $80 for 10 oz.
ZIIP's gels run from $29.99 to $79.99 depending on formula.
Neither brand publishes how many sessions a bottle delivers, so no honest cost-per-session figure exists for either, and anyone quoting one is guessing.
On a two-year view, both devices carry a few hundred dollars of conductor behind the sticker price, which we have set out across the whole category in what every branded gel costs.
Clearances and models
NuFACE has the deeper regulatory history, with records including K201680 for the MINI+, K191672 for the earlier Mini, and K201782 and K212947 associated with the Trinity line, plus K161654 covering the gel itself.
ZIIP's Halo is associated with K212342.
Both sit under the product code covering transcutaneous electrical stimulators for aesthetic purposes, and in both cases the cleared indication is cosmetic facial stimulation rather than any biological claim. Our guide to checking any brand's clearance explains how to read those records.
On price, NuFACE MINI+ lists at $250 with a frequent $175 sale price, Trinity+ is $395, and ZIIP Halo is $399.99.
Who each one suits
Buy NuFACE if you want the simpler device, no app dependence, the option of stepping up to attachments later, and the reassurance of the longest clearance history in this category.
Buy ZIIP if the guided treatment library is genuinely what will get you to use it, and if you like the idea of different programmes for different days rather than one routine.
Buy neither if what has changed is the shape of your lower face rather than its surface, because both devices sit below the level that contracts a muscle and say so in their own materials.
That last point is where our own devices sit, and it is the only sentence in this article where we are relevant. If you want the comparison including us, it is in our NuFACE piece and our ZIIP piece.
This article sits inside our full map of the category, where we set out all 33 devices we track, what each one carries and what each brand publishes: Nine Technologies on One Dial, What the Rest of the Market Actually Carries.