I have no conclusion yet (because what I’ve measured so far is for summer only - and what summer!) but I managed to identify some trends.
First observation: except for rain (but again, I had very little rain this summer) the values are very consistent between the 2 stations.
Pressure/temperatures are almost always equivalent.
Relative humidity seems more precise (a better “granularity”) with WF in the 88% - 98% range (the Netatmo seems to proceed “stepwise” values on this range and that sucks for psychrometry computation).
Wind strengths seems more precise with WF (and a little higher than Netatmo). But, I must investigate more on this topic. Note the manual “calibration” for wind angle are as bad for one station as for the other (when will these wind gauges will embark an automatic positioning system?)
Rain are not fully ok for now, but I’m waiting more rain for the last weeks/months and I will be able to refine my judgment.
Regarding pressure, temperature and humidity I can see a true difference between the 2 brands: WF is by far more “reactive” to variations. The “inertia” of the Netatmo seems strong in comparison (and that’s not a good point for Netatmo).
Regarding “external” thing to measurements, there is a incredible difference in term of radio signal. That’s absolutely huge… WF can communicate over distances at least 4 times greater than Netatmo.
Here it is. Again, that’s not conclusion, just raw observations…