Compare ULTRALOQ Bolt Fingerprint Smart Lock vs Schlage Encode Smart Lock

Remote access was a major failure point for one reviewer because unstable Wi-Fi made remote control impossible.

Remote access was strongly praised for checking status, letting people in, locking from away, and fast reliable remote operation.

Fingerprint access was the strongest consensus feature: nearly every reviewer found it fast, accurate, reliable, or instantly responsive, with only occasional issues noted.

One reviewer specifically wished the lock added fingerprint recognition, so the lack of it counted as a limitation.

Pick resistance was criticized by the lock-picking review, which was not impressed with the anti-pick features.

Only one review directly tied the lock’s construction to pick/key resistance, saying it would be difficult for a thief to duplicate the key.

Geofencing and auto-unlock were mixed: some reviewers found it useful or better than most, while others found it slow or inconsistent.

Geofencing was repeatedly identified as missing, with reviewers noting the lack of hands-free auto-unlock as a meaningful convenience gap.

The door sensor was useful for door-open awareness and auto-lock behavior, but reviewers disliked its looks and noted it was not exposed to Apple Home.

The main door-sense evidence was negative: the lock can auto-lock without knowing whether the door is actually shut.

The Matter model’s motor was the sharpest hardware complaint, described as grinding, whining, and unpleasant.

Motor feedback was mixed: one reviewer found it quiet, another said it was strong, while others complained it was loud or grinding.

Hub requirements depended on the version and workflow: built-in Wi-Fi avoided a separate bridge for one reviewer, while the Matter model drew criticism for bridge needs.

Reviewers strongly agreed that built-in Wi-Fi and no hub, bridge, or adapter is one of the lock’s clearest advantages.

The backup cylinder/keyway drew a critical expert reaction because the key bow and blade combination was described as highly unusual for North American locks.

A locksmith judged the cylinder well-made but not impossible to pick, making keyway quality respectable rather than exceptional.

Existing hardware reuse was mixed: one reviewer thought reusing the old strike would save time, but that choice made installation take longer.

One review treated hardware reuse as a drawback because Encode replaces the whole deadbolt instead of modifying the existing one.

Security features beyond the core lock were praised, especially anti-peep PIN entry and the usefulness of random digits when someone may be watching.

The only direct encryption evidence was positive, with the reviewer praising the lock’s encrypted Bluetooth.

Auto-lock was highly valued when it worked, with multiple reviewers praising its usefulness, but one reviewer could not enable it reliably.

Auto-lock was widely useful for forgotten doors, though reviewers warned that timing and lack of door awareness can create practical issues.

Guest and temporary access was a clear strength, with reviewers appreciating scheduled access, single-use or limited codes, and easy access for neighbors or service visitors.

Guest access was a major strength, with praise for many codes, scheduling, temporary access, texts, and family/service-person use; single-use code absence was the main caveat.

Physical attack resistance had strong evidence from ANSI-grade commentary and especially from an expert’s praise for bump resistance.

Physical security was repeatedly praised through Grade 1/AAA ratings, reinforced hardware, and confidence against forced entry.

User access management was praised for scheduled codes, admin/normal/temporary roles, and flexible control over who can enter and when.

User management was praised for quick code creation, schedules, granular options, and caregiver/parent use cases.

Access logs were praised where reviewers discussed them, especially for showing who entered or left and maintaining a robust lock/unlock history.

Reviewers found the history/audit trail useful for seeing who entered and when, especially for family, guests, and rental-style access.

Unlock speed was praised across most reviews, especially through fingerprint and app commands, though one Matter review found Matter actions slightly slower.

Lock/unlock response was usually fast or instant, with one reviewer describing it as only somewhat more responsive than another lock.

The physical keypad was a recurring positive because reviewers liked the tactile feel, responsiveness, and guest-friendly button design.

The keypad was generally praised as easy, bright, backlit, and accessible, with one reviewer noting a nighttime first-press annoyance.

Wi-Fi was polarizing: built-in Wi-Fi was a major idea, but one reviewer had severe reliability failures and another criticized a Matter version for lacking built-in Wi-Fi.

Wi-Fi was strongly valued for direct remote control without extra hardware, though battery drain and one weak connection were caveats.

Bluetooth drew a limited but important caveat: one Apple Home-focused reviewer found Bluetooth-based control a little slow at times.

The only explicit Bluetooth judgment was positive, emphasizing encrypted Bluetooth in the lock.

Voice control was positive in one professional review with Alexa and Siri working well, but another review captured a Siri non-response.

Voice control generally worked well, especially with Alexa, but Google unlocking limits lowered the overall score.

Notifications were consistently praised as helpful, especially for open-door alerts, user-specific activity, and keeping track of household or guest access.

Notifications were usually useful for lock status and user activity, but reviewers noted missed battery warnings and no active invalid-code alert.

App feedback ranged from excellent and simple to inconsistent; some reviewers found the app easy or seamless, while one had repeated connection problems.

Most reviewers found the Schlage Home or Key app easy, responsive, and useful, with some caveats about simplicity or setup complexity.

Smart-home integration was a major selling point across reviews, but enthusiasm was tempered by missing Home Key, Home Assistant issues, and model-specific platform limits.

Smart-home integration was useful with Alexa, Google, Ring, Amazon Key, and Home Assistant, but limited by HomeKit, IFTTT, SmartThings, Google unlock, and Ring Alarm gaps.

Battery impressions were mixed: reviewers liked the long-life claims or early battery status, but disliked replaceable AAs, limited battery detail, or the number of cells.

Battery feedback was mixed: built-in Wi-Fi drains AA batteries faster, but warnings and at least one long-term experience were positive.

Value was mixed: reviewers said it offered a lot or a reasonable price, but several still called it expensive or undercut by software flaws.

Value was mixed but leaned positive: several reviewers called it pricey, yet many found the security, reliability, and features worth the cost.

Core lock operation was usually reliable in testing, but app-based locking and unlocking was inconsistent for one reviewer and the Matter model had a loud motor caveat.

Locking reliability was one of the strongest areas, with reviewers reporting perfect tests, flawless keyless entry, smooth unlocking, and dependable performance.

Installation was one of the clearest strengths: reviewers repeatedly called setup easy, quick, straightforward, or manageable with only a few screws.

Installation was usually described as easy and quick, although programming, Wi-Fi setup, or third-party app setup could be confusing.

Mechanical key backup worked in the hands-on demo, with the reviewer noting the keys looked good and successfully operated the lock.

Reviewers valued the physical key backup, especially as protection against dead batteries or smart-function failures.

Build impressions were mostly positive, with reviewers praising solidity and materials, though one Matter review raised longevity concerns because of the motor noise.

Reviewers consistently described the lock as solid, sturdy, beefy, heavy, or secure-feeling.

Industrial design split reviewers: some liked the size, solidity, or simple look, while others found it cheap-looking or unattractive.

Exterior design earned praise for style and curb appeal, but interior hardware size and appearance drew criticism.

Alarm loudness was split: one review called the siren quiet, while a locksmith found it very loud and annoying.

A locksmith observed that repeated invalid codes temporarily disable the keypad, showing the lockout behavior works, though active alerts were missing.

A locksmith praised the adjustable backset as working with almost any door in normal installations.

Reviewers generally found the lock fit existing deadbolt openings or aligned well after adjustment, with no structural door changes needed in tested installs.

Weather resistance received positive support from the reviewer who connected the IP65 rating with durability for rain and dust exposure.

Ring doorbell/live-view control was praised when supported, but Ring Alarm compatibility created a major limitation in one review.

Finish durability evidence was positive, with praise for fit and finish and expectations that the revised keypad materials and printed numbers would wear better.

Touchscreen feedback was mostly positive for responsiveness and cold-use practicality, though one reviewer stressed it is not a true modern glass touchscreen.

Warranty evidence was limited but positive, with one locksmith calling its electronics warranty the longest among reviewed locks.