The reliability and accuracy of five portable blood lactate (BLa) analysers (Lactate Pro, Lactate Pro2, Lactate Scout+, Xpress™, and Edge) and one handheld point-of-care analyser (i-STAT) were compared to a criterion (Radiometer ABL90). Two devices of each brand of analyser were assessed using 22 x 6 mL blood samples taken from five subjects at rest and during exercise who generated lactate ranging ~1-23 mM. Each sample was measured simultaneously ~6 times on each device. Reliability was assessed as the within-sample standard deviation (wsSD) of the six replicates; accuracy as the bias compared with the ABL90; and overall error (the root mean squared error (√MSE)) was calculated as the square root of (wsSD² and bias²). The √MSE indicated that both the Edge and Xpress had low total error (~0-2 mM) for lactate concentrations <15 mM, whereas the Edge and Lactate Pro2 were the better of the portable analysers for concentrations >15 mM. In all cases, bias (negative) was the major contribution to the √MSE. In conclusion, in a clinical setting where BLa is generally <15 mM the Edge and Xpress devices are relevant, but for athlete testing where peak BLa is important for training prescription the Edge and Lactate Pro2 are preferred.

• The reliability of five common portable blood lactate analysers were generally <0.5 mM for concentrations in the range of ~1.0-10 mM.

• For all five portable analysers, the analytical error within a brand was much smaller than the biological variation in blood lactate (BLa).

• Compared with a criterion blood lactate analyser, there was a tendency for all portable analysers to under-read (i.e. a negative bias), which was particularly evident at the highest concentrations (BLa ~15-23 mM).

• The practical application of these negative biases would overestimate the ability of the athlete and prescribe a training intensity that would be too high.