Compare eufy Video Smart Lock E330 vs myQ Secure View 3-in-1 Smart Lock

Reviewers who evaluated event history found it useful for checking clips and seeing who came or went, especially for family awareness.

Access-log evidence was limited but positive, with one reviewer noting individual pins can show who opened the door.

The app was consistently praised as simple, polished, and useful for setup, live view, lock control, access management, and monitoring.

The app setup experience was praised as simple, with phone control presented as easy to use.

Auto-lock drew strong praise for reliably relocking after a set time and reducing worry about whether the door was left unlocked.

Auto-lock support was viewed as useful and configurable, though the evidence centers on one reviewer’s setup experience.

The failed-attempt lockout behavior was viewed as a strong security safeguard when someone keeps entering wrong codes or fingerprints.

Battery feedback was the most divided area: some reviewers liked the removable rechargeable pack, while others reported short runtime or slow charging.

Battery impressions were mixed: reviewers liked the rechargeable pack, but one noted a long initial charge time.

Build quality was rated very highly, with reviewers repeatedly describing the lock as metal, sturdy, well made, durable, and high quality.

Reviewers praised the physical construction, describing the lock as a great quality product and super well built.

Camera and doorbell performance was generally strong, with sharp 2K video, good night vision, fast loading, and useful two-way features, though field of view and door placement limited some setups.

Camera and doorbell evidence was positive, with praise for clear visitor video, a wide-angle view, and the integrated 2K camera-doorbell design.

Door-sense was weakly supported because a reviewer specifically wanted a sensor to know whether the door was open or closed.

Door-sense worked in the reviewer’s test, with the app state updating once the door closed.

Door compatibility was a major caveat because screen doors, storm doors, deep jambs, and awkward door angles could compromise the camera or overall fit.

Door-fit evidence was limited but positive: one reviewer’s older steel door prep worked with the included jig and deadbolt drilling guidance.

Existing hardware reuse scored well in the one clear opinionated case, where the lock worked with an existing strike plate and the reviewer called that nice.

Facial recognition was mixed: HomeBase-linked identification worked in one test, while another reviewer wanted face-based unlocking added.

Facial recognition drew some of the strongest praise, with reviewers calling it cool, incredible, and very fast.

Fingerprint access was one of the strongest areas, repeatedly described as fast, accurate, responsive, convenient, and the preferred unlock method.

Fingerprint access performed well in hands-on testing, with the reviewer saying the biometrics worked completely.

Guest access was praised when reviewers could give temporary or remote user access without handing over physical keys.

Guest access was praised for service or pet-care scenarios where the owner could let someone in without sharing a key.

Hub requirement was mixed because the lock can work without a HomeBase, but one reviewer disliked needing a separate chime when used alone.

Industrial design was well liked, with reviewers calling the lock sleek, compact, sharp, premium-looking, and attractive.

The lock’s integrated design was praised for reducing separate-device clutter and for looking slick and well designed.

Installation and setup were consistently praised as quick, easy, straightforward, foolproof, or among the easiest smart-lock setups reviewers had tried.

Hands-on reviewers generally found installation approachable, praising complete hardware, easy installation, clear directions, and a smooth process, with one longer install still going fairly smoothly.

Key override reliability scored well because reviewers appreciated the hidden physical key and backup power options for dead-battery situations.

The hidden key backup was viewed positively, and another reviewer liked that the lock still had multiple fallback options.

The keypad was viewed positively for reliability, passcode flexibility, and backlighting, although one reviewer treated keypad access as less preferred than fingerprint.

Keypad evidence was mixed: one reviewer preferred physical buttons, while another confirmed the pin code worked.

Keyway quality was a recurring weakness because multiple reviewers noted the lock cannot be rekeyed or needs a locksmith for extra keys.

Lock and unlock speed scored strongly in the one clear opinionated review that called the lock fast and quiet.

Speed was a standout: one article cited two-second unlock latency, while a hands-on reviewer found face recognition extremely fast.

The locking motor was praised as smooth and responsive in hands-on use.

The interior locking action received strong praise from a reviewer who described it as super smooth.

Locking reliability scored highly where reviewers focused on the smart-lock half, calling it responsive and saying it worked as advertised.

A hands-on reviewer tested multiple unlock methods and found them working successfully.

Notifications were a clear strength, with reviewers describing alerts as nearly instant, responsive, fast, or consistent.

Notification evidence was mixed: one review praised context-aware alerts, while another noted unsubscribed alerts lacked detection details.

Remote access was rated very highly because reviewers liked being able to view, unlock, greet visitors, or control the lock from the app remotely.

Remote access was praised for letting someone enter without needing a physical key handoff.

Security features such as scramble passcode and failed-attempt protections were praised as sensible, useful, and security-enhancing.

Security handling for face scans was praised because the reviewer said scans stay on the device rather than going to the cloud.

Smart-home integration was mixed-positive: Alexa, Google, Apple Watch, and Eufy ecosystem links were appreciated, but lack of HomeKit hurt one review.

Integration evidence was split: myQ ecosystem control was praised, but multiple reviews criticized or warned about limited popular smart-home platform support.

Touchscreen visibility scored poorly in the one clear opinionated review because the keypad and doorbell button were hard to find in the dark.

The touch-sensitive keypad divided preference, with one reviewer noting some people may prefer physical buttons instead.

User access management scored well where reviewers valued adding users, codes, and fingerprints with access rules.

User access management was described as easy for users, PIN codes, and alerts.

Value was mostly positive thanks to all-in-one convenience and savings versus higher-tier models, though one reviewer stressed that the lock is not cheap.

Value depends heavily on use case: reviewers praised the feature bundle and recommendations, but flagged overkill, subscriptions, and fee concerns.

Voice control was positively received, especially Alexa integration, chime support, and hands-free unlocking through assistants.

Weather resistance scored strongly where reviewers found the lock handled rain, hot conditions, or outdoor exposure well.

Weather protection was praised through the exterior gasket, which a reviewer said sealed well to keep moisture out.

Wi-Fi was mixed-positive: one reviewer saw fast alerts even on weak 2.4GHz Wi-Fi, while another warned experience depends on network strength.