Zwift vs Rouvy vs MyWhoosh. The Virtual Cycling Showdown

Indoor cycling has become a three-horse race. After spending winter months in all three virtual worlds, I can tell you the differences matter more than you’d expect. Your choice shapes not just the visuals but how you train, socialize, and stay motivated through dark months.

The Graphics and Immersion

Rouvy’s real-road augmented reality technology creates an undeniable connection to actual places. Climbing Alpe d’Huez while watching the actual road unfold triggers something Zwift’s cartoon graphics can’t match. The video quality has improved dramatically, making outdoor rides indoors feel plausible.

Zwift’s Watopia and expanding world offer polish and production value. The graphics won’t fool anyone, but the consistent aesthetic creates genuine immersion. New routes and events keep the platform fresh.

MyWhoosh entered as the budget alternative with ambitions matching Zwift’s scope. Graphics fall between Rouvy’s realism and Zwift’s stylization. The free model changes the value calculation entirely.

Training Structure

Zwift’s workout library and training programs remain the gold standard. Integration with TrainerRoad brings serious structure to the platform. Group workouts create accountability that solo training lacks.

Rouvy focuses on route-based training. Climbing real mountains provides motivation that structured intervals can’t. The training programs exist but feel secondary to the riding experience.

MyWhoosh offers workouts and structured training, but the library lacks depth. For serious training, you’ll likely import workouts from external sources.

The Social Factor

Zwift owns group riding. The massive user base means always finding others to ride with. Racing leagues, social rides, and random encounters create genuine community. Events fill constantly at every level.

Rouvy’s smaller population means lonelier roads. Group rides exist but require more scheduling. The community is growing but can’t match Zwift’s critical mass.

MyWhoosh is building community aggressively, often sponsoring professional teams and events. The free model attracts users, but retention and active rider counts trail competitors.

Hardware and Integration

All three work with major smart trainers and power meters. Zwift’s hardware partnerships provide the smoothest experience. Rouvy and MyWhoosh integrate well but occasionally show rough edges with newer devices.

AppleTV support varies. Zwift runs smoothly. Rouvy works with limitations. MyWhoosh requires iOS devices or computers.

The Price Question

Zwift: $15/month

Rouvy: $15/month

MyWhoosh: Free

MyWhoosh’s free model disrupts the market. The platform generates revenue through partnerships and advertising rather than subscriptions. Whether that model sustains long-term development remains uncertain.

The Verdict

Zwift wins for training variety, social riding, and racing. The ecosystem and community create engagement nothing else matches.

Rouvy wins for real-world connection. Riders motivated by actual routes and virtual tourism find genuine value in the AR approach.

MyWhoosh wins on value. Free access to a functional platform with improving features makes indoor cycling accessible. Serious training is possible.

My trainer runs Zwift most days for the community and workouts. But Rouvy loads when I need motivation from real roads. MyWhoosh serves as backup and budget recommendation for friends getting started.

The virtual cycling world has room for all three. Your choice depends on what makes you want to clip in when the weather keeps you inside.