Most readings on this site come from measurements I took myself, with my own EMF meters, in real homes. I log what I can: the meter, the setting, how far I was from the source, and the time of day. That way you can see the conditions behind a number instead of taking it on faith. Where a reading came from someone else, I say so and name who took it.
This page is the record of how the testing works, and where it stops.
Key Takeaways
- Almost every number here came off my own EMF meter, in a real home, with the conditions logged. The rare exception is labeled.
- I lead with two EMF detectors most people end up buying: the TriField TF2 and the GQ EMF-390.
- For radio frequency specifically, I use a Safe and Sound Pro II, which reads much fainter signals than an all-in-one can.
- I bought every meter here myself.
The Meters
TriField TF2. My main all-in-one. It reads magnetic, electric, and radio frequency fields, one at a time, using a dial to switch between them. The magnetic sensor is three-axis, so magnetic readings depend on where the meter is, not which way you point it. The electric and RF sensors are single-axis, so those two do change with how you hold it, and your hand can block the RF signal if you cover the top. Stated accuracy is ±4% for magnetic, ±5% for electric, and ±20% for RF, and it reads RF from 20 MHz to 6 GHz.
GQ EMF-390. My other all-in-one, and I use it as much as the TF2. Its best feature is that it shows all three field types on one screen at the same time, where the TF2 makes you switch. It also logs readings over time, which is how I catch things that happen while nobody is watching, and it has a display showing which frequency band the activity sits in.
Both are good meters. I go back and forth between them depending on what I’m doing.
Safe and Sound Pro II. A radio-frequency meter and nothing else, and it’s the right choice if RF is the only thing you care about. Two reasons I use it. It reads far fainter signals than an all-in-one: down to 0.005 µW/m², where the TF2’s RF mode bottoms out around 1 µW/m². And each unit is individually calibrated and ships with a calibration certificate, which the all-in-ones do not.
Safe and Sound Pro III. The newer version of the Pro II, also RF only.
Cornet ED88TPlus, ErickHill ER02, Latnex AF-5000. Meters I bought so I could review them. If you’re trying to choose between a few options, I’d rather own them and tell you how they behave than compare spec sheets.
Greenwave Dirty Electricity meter. For dirty electricity, the electrical noise that rides on your home’s wiring. Ordinary EMF meters can’t see it. I use this one to find it, and to check whether a filter actually changed anything.
I paid for all of them myself. No manufacturer gave me a meter, and if that ever changes, the review will say so on the page.
Why I Lead With the All-in-Ones
Because they’re the meters most people end up with, and a site whose numbers only work on expensive professional meters isn’t much use to the person reading it. The TF2 and the EMF-390 are what my how-to articles assume you’re holding.
The Pro II comes out when the job calls for it: when I’m comparing meters in a review, when a reading is too faint for an all-in-one to see properly, or when someone’s buying decision depends on the number being right.
What I’ve Tested and What I Haven’t
Recommendations here come in two kinds, and every one of them says which kind it is.
Tested by me. I own it. I measured with it, or measured against it, in a real home.
Not tested yet. I don’t own it. The recommendation rests on published specs and what other reviewers found, and the entry says so plainly. When I buy one, I update it with real readings.
Most of what I recommend is in the first group, and I’m working to shrink the second. No commission changes which label a product gets.
What I Log
For readings that appear in an article, I try to record:
- which meter and which setting
- how far I was from the source, measured rather than guessed
- the time of day
- what was running at the time
- whether the number is a peak, a typical level, or a range
That last one matters. Most radio frequency readings jump around, because routers and phones transmit in bursts rather than steadily. A peak and a typical level are two different facts, so I say which one I’m giving you.
The Rules
Take a baseline. Before measuring sources, I take a reading in the middle of the room. A number next to a router tells you about the router either way, but the baseline is what tells you whether a spot is unusual for that home, and it’s what before-and-after comparisons get measured against.
Watch it long enough to see the pattern. Most RF readings jump around, so a single glance at the screen isn’t a measurement. I watch a spot for a while and report what I saw: the highest peak, the level it sits at between bursts, or the range it moved through. If a number was a one-time spike, I say so rather than presenting it as the usual level.
One meter per comparison. When I measure the same source at one foot, three feet, and ten feet to show how quickly it drops off, all of those readings come from the same meter. Different meters give different numbers for the same field, so mixing them would make the comparison meaningless. Same rule for before-and-after tests.
Fixes get proven. If I say a change lowered a reading, I measured before and after under the same conditions. That includes the changes that didn’t work, which get published too.
No false precision. Every meter has a margin of error, and they differ. The TF2 is rated ±4% for magnetic, ±5% for electric, and ±20% for RF. GQ doesn’t publish accuracy figures for the EMF-390 the way AlphaLab does for the TF2, which is worth knowing. So I give ranges and comparisons rather than pretending the last digit is meaningful.
Where the Readings Come From
Most come from my own home, which is why the same router, microwave, and lamp cord keep showing up: they’re real fixtures I can re-measure any time a number needs checking.
Some come from homes of friends and family who ask me to measure theirs. Those visits haven’t all been logged to the standard this page describes, so they don’t appear in the published tables yet. As that changes, the ranges in What Is a Normal EMF Reading in a House? get wider, and that page says plainly how many homes are behind it at any time.
Those homes stay anonymous. I describe them by room and situation, never by name or address.
What My Numbers Are For
They’re reference points, not standards.
Your home has different sources, different wiring, different neighbors, and a different meter. So your numbers won’t match mine, and they aren’t supposed to. What mine are good for is showing you what a reading looks like, what changes when you move something, and roughly what range to expect.
The comparison that actually tells you something is inside your own home: this room against that one, this spot before and after you moved the router.
Photos
The meter photos here are mine, taken during the test they illustrate, with the display and setting visible so you can see the reading yourself. No stock photos, and none of the glowing-red-waves artwork this subject attracts.
What I Don’t Do
I don’t make up numbers. A reading either came from my own testing, or it’s labeled with whose testing it came from.
And I don’t publish stories about how people felt. If EMF affects how you feel, that experience is yours and it’s real to you, and I’m not going to dismiss it. But a feeling isn’t something I can measure, and measurements are the only thing this site can honestly offer. Anything about symptoms belongs with a doctor, not with me.
Corrections
If I get something wrong, I fix it on the page and note what changed. I’d rather you catch me than trust me.
Where This Stops
I’m not a lab. Consumer meters have real margins of error, and no amount of careful method changes that.
My meters also don’t reach millimeter-wave 5G, the very high frequency band above 24 GHz. That band is real, though it’s only deployed in a small number of dense city areas so far, and it’s covered in Meter Frequency Range: Why It Matters. I’m planning to add a meter that reads it, and this page will change when I do.
And I’m not a doctor or an engineer. I’m a parent who bought a meter, learned to use it properly, and shows the work. I can tell you what a field measured in a particular spot at a particular time. What that means for anyone’s health is a question for the scientific bodies I cite, and for anything personal, a professional.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can you come measure my home?
No. This isn’t a consulting service, and the homes I measure belong to family and friends. If you want professional measurement, that’s a real service worth paying for. If you’d rather do it yourself, the whole Measuring & Auditing section exists to teach you.
Why don’t my readings match yours?
Different home, different sources, different meter, different moment. Mine are reference points, not standards. The comparisons worth making are inside your own home, against your own baseline.
Do the affiliate links affect the verdicts?
Every commercial page carries a disclosure, and the protection against bias isn’t a promise, it’s the method: I measure before and after, I publish the products that didn’t work, and every entry says whether I own the product or am going on specs and other reviewers’ results.
Which meter should I start with?
For most people, an all-in-one that reads all three field types. Which one depends on what you want from it, and I go through that in Best EMF Meters.