Belkin・THREEKEY・オウルテックのMagSafe充電器3台

Belkin vs THREEKEY vs Owltech MagSafe Chargers: Which One for the Bedside?

This is the English edition of a review from my Japanese YouTube channel, iestaLife. I review gadgets from my home studio in Japan, so product links go to Amazon Japan.

Quick take

I wanted a MagSafe wireless charger for my bedside, so I bought the Belkin 15 W model and put it next to two chargers I had already reviewed: a THREEKEY Qi2 charger with a cooling fan, and an Owltech charger that doubles as a phone ring. All three charge an iPhone and AirPods just fine. The real difference is where each one fits. For the bedroom, I chose the Belkin.

Belkin MagSafe charger used as a stand
The Belkin with its kickstand out, working as a bedside clock

What I tested

  • Belkin Ultra Charge Magnetic Charger, 15 W version (fixed cable, built-in kickstand)
  • THREEKEY MagSafe charger, 25 W (cooling fan, LED light, magnetic on both sides)
  • Owltech magnetic wireless charger with a built-in phone ring, 15 W
  • A kitchen scale for weight, plus AirPods charging on each pad

What I found

  • Weight on my scale: Belkin 47.2 g (about 80 g with its cable), THREEKEY 61.2 g, Owltech 85.2 g.
  • The Belkin is plain black with no decoration, which blended in best with my dark-brown bed frame.
  • Its kickstand lets you watch videos while charging, or leave the iPhone on its side as a clock. Magnet strength felt just average.
  • Because the cable is fixed, the cable’s natural curl sometimes kept the stand from sitting flat. A detachable cable could be swapped for an L-shaped one; this one can’t.
  • The THREEKEY fan was so quiet I had to hold the mic close to hear it. One button press turns off the light, a second press stops the fan.
  • The back of the THREEKEY is magnetic too, so you can mount it on a MagSafe stand or car holder you already own.
  • The Owltech is 9.5 mm thick and about 2.5 times the weight of a typical MagSafe ring, so I wouldn’t carry it around. At home, it works well as a stand while charging, with no cable sticking out of the bottom of the phone.
  • AirPods charged on all three. On the Owltech, AirPods in a case responded poorly; without the case they charged normally.

The three chargers compared

Belkin 15 WTHREEKEY 25 WOwltech ring charger
Belkin Ultra ChargeTHREEKEY MagSafe chargerOwltech ring charger
Max output15 W25 W15 W
Weight (my scale)47.2 g (about 80 g with cable)61.2 g85.2 g
CableFixedDetachable (included)Detachable (included)
StandBuilt-in kickstandNone; mount it on a MagSafe standThe ring works as a stand
ExtrasPlain, minimal designCooling fan, LED lightDoubles as a phone ring

Who it’s for

Pick the Belkin if you want something that disappears on a nightstand. Pick the THREEKEY if you want faster charging, a fan, and the option to add wireless charging to a stand or car mount you already use. Pick the Owltech if you want a charger that also works as a ring and stand around the house.

Watch the review

【MagSafe充電器】多機能かシンプルか。Belkin・オウルテック・THREEKEYを徹底比較!

The video is in Japanese. Around 5:20 shows the Belkin as a bedside stand, and around 7:50 the weigh-in of all three. I also made separate videos on the THREEKEY fan noise and the Owltech ring charger.

Limitations

I didn’t time full charges, so I can’t give charging-speed numbers for each pad. The THREEKEY manual recommends a 45 W or higher adapter; in my separate test it still ran on a 20 W adapter, but I don’t recommend that. Prices at the time of recording were roughly ¥2,700 to ¥3,500 for the Belkin depending on color, around ¥3,000 for the THREEKEY, and around ¥2,000 to ¥2,500 for the Owltech. Some of these may only be sold in Japan.

Products

Belkin Ultra Charge Magnetic Charger 15 W: on Amazon Japan

THREEKEY MagSafe charger 25 W: on Amazon Japan

Owltech magnetic wireless charger with phone ring: on Amazon Japan

The Amazon Japan links above are affiliate links. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Check the listing for the exact model, current price and shipping availability in your region.

More reviews in English

This review is also available in Japanese.