It's been 18 years since the first iPhone was released in America, making it old enough to vote, drink (in Australia) and remind us of the cruel passage of time. We've come a long way since then and today, even entry-level to mid-range Android and iOS devices can easily meet the demands of most consumers.
Hardware and overall performance have been so good for so long that typical users don't necessarily need to shell out $2000 or more for a decent smartphone any more. These days, manufacturers mostly focus on camera performance and software – particularly AI.
But that doesn't mean the market is dud-free. Rather, what is considered a poor performer in 2025 may have been a decent phone in 2020. It's important to keep this context in mind if you can remember the birth of the iPhone – how are your joints feeling, by the way?
In our comprehensive product tests, our experts have identified the smartphones you should avoid and the models with the worst battery life.
The worst smartphones in our test
The poorest performers in our smartphone test also happen to be the cheapest. Though the market is full of models that are arguably overpriced, the low-cost end is very much a case of getting what you paid for.
Even at $149, the Motorola Moto G04 isn't worth the asking price.
Motorola Moto G04
- Price (RRP): $149
- CHOICE Expert Rating: 49%
- Camera quality score: 41%
- Battery life score: 55%
- Performance score: 38%
- Display score: 41%
- Battery life (hours): 33:00
While there's absolutely a market for basic, low-cost phones designed to get the job done, the Moto G04 has one major flaw. It doesn't get the job done.
Overall performance, sound and display quality are all poor, with the screen lacking sharpness and clarity. Don't rush to bust out that selfie stick either, because the camera is pretty subpar as well.
It is quite durable, however. Ironic, given that you'll probably want to break this middling Motorola as soon as possible.
Read the full Motorola Moto G04 review.
The G22 isn't a good deal at $349.
Nokia G22
- Price (RRP): $349
- CHOICE Expert Rating: 53%
- Camera quality score: 43%
- Battery life score: 58%
- Performance score: 41%
- Display score: 55%
- Battery life (hours): 34:00
While Nokia's G22 is a bit better than the Moto G04, it isn't worth the extra $200. Maybe it would be a decent deal at $149, but $349? Get outta here.
Performance and camera quality are substandard and additional features like the GPS, fingerprint scanner and even networking (mobile data) don't work very well. Though the screen fares slightly better, it's still only OK and may not have great clarity in bright, outdoor environments.
Read the full Nokia G22 review.
Nokia's G42 5G is nothing to write home about.
Nokia G42 5G
- Price (RRP): $449
- CHOICE Expert Rating: 58%
- Camera quality score: 52%
- Battery life score: 58%
- Performance score: 50%
- Display score: 56%
- Battery life (hours): 35:30
Paying $449 for an OK phone is a bit rich when you can find some much better models for around $100 more. It's just so middle of the road that it's really only worth considering during a sale.
The G42 5G does have a decent set of features that operate well and it is quite durable. But everything else – display, overall performance, camera quality and battery life – are only OK. Actually, there isn't much more to say, this phone is just that average.
Read the full G42 5G review.
Poor performance means the G24 runs slowly and the display is difficult to use.
Motorola Moto G24
- Price (RRP): $229
- CHOICE Expert Rating: 59%
- Camera quality score: 51%
- Battery life score: 61%
- Performance score: 43%
- Display score: 49%
- Battery life (hours): 43:00
The G24 isn't too bad when you consider the price, but it falls apart in some key areas. Performance is poor, which means this phone runs slowly.
That may not be a deal breaker depending on your needs but the borderline quality screen is also difficult to use. That alone is enough to make this smartphone one to avoid.
Credit where credit is due, however, sound quality is great. Perhaps it is worth considering if you love listening to music exclusively through smartphone speakers (that's a joke, please don't do that).
Read the full Motorola Moto G24 review.
Smartphones with the shortest battery life in our test
Google might be one of the biggest tech companies on the planet, but many of its smartphones bombed out in our battery tests. These are the only models to score below 50% in our battery life test, despite many being at the pricier end of the spectrum.
Google's Pixel range has the lowest scoring batteries in our test.
Google Pixel 8
- Price (RRP): $1187
- Battery life score: 48%
- Battery life (hours): 19:30
Google Pixel 9 Pro Fold
- Price (RRP): $2699
- Battery life score: 48%
- Battery life (hh:mm): 18:00
Google Pixel 8a
- Price (RRP): $949
- Battery life score: 49%
- Battery life (hh:mm): 22:30
Google Pixel 9
- Price (RRP): $1499
- Battery life score: 49%
- Battery life (hh:mm): 21:00
Google Pixel 9 Pro
- Price (RRP): $1849
- Battery life score: 49%
- Battery life (hh:mm): 21:00
We're on your side
For more than 60 years, we've been making a difference for Australian consumers. In that time, we've never taken ads or sponsorship.
Instead we're funded by members who value expert reviews and independent product testing.
With no self-interest behind our advice, you don't just buy smarter, you get the answers that you need.
You know without hesitation what's safe for you and your family.
And you'll never be alone when something goes wrong or a business treats you unfairly.
Learn more about CHOICE membership today
Stock images: Getty, unless otherwise stated.
