Frizzlife WB99-C Review: Lab Analysis & Hands-On Testing

Full Analysis of the Frizzlife WB99-C

Filtration: 3.68/5.00

The Frizzlife WB99-C countertop RO system scored 3.68/5.00 for filtration. How? Most importantly, while it achieved great results in our 2024 lab testing, our 2025 results were only adequate. The filtered water was odorless and tasted clean, but the system has no NSF/ANSI-certified contaminants or 3rd party testing for contaminant reduction.

1. Lab Results: 3.69/5.00 (2025) & 4.68/5.00 (2024)

In our 2024 and 2025 lab tests comparing an unfiltered and a filtered tap water sample, the Frizzlife could remove 11 undesirable impurities and contaminants to below the minimum detection level (so essentially to 100%): chlorine, bromodichloromethane, bromoform, dibromochloromethane, chloroform, copper, barium, lithium, iron, aluminum, and zinc.

The following substances remained in our water:

• Boron was reduced by a very poor 20% in 2024. In 2025, it was reduced by a moderate 51%.
• Strontium was reduced by a very high 98% in 2024 and was completely removed in 2025.
• Manganese was reduced by a solid 78% in 2025 (not present in 2024).
• Nitrate was reduced by a very high 92% in 2025. In 2024, nitrate was not present in our feed water and was measured at <0.50 ppm in the filtered water. While this may suggest leaching at first glance, we’re confident this increase is due to natural fluctuations, as we’ve found significant amounts of nitrate in our water supply before.
• Fluoride was reduced by a moderate 52% in 2024. However, in 2025 we used a different and presumably more precise fluoride detection method and fluoride was completely eliminated.

Finally, TDS decreased by 91% in 2024 and by 87% in 2025. While TDS should not be interpreted independently, as it does not override inadequate removal of individual contaminants, ≥90% TDS reduction is high and shows that the RO membrane works as intended. ≥85% is still good but not as high as the more effective RO systems. That said, the Frizzlife features an alkaline carbon fiber post-filter which adds beneficial minerals back into the water and increases its TDS. Consequently, a slightly lower amount of TDS removal is expected. 

Aside from contaminant reduction, we found manganese (0.02 ppm) and silver (0.01 ppm) in our 2024 filtered water that were not present in the unfiltered water, suggesting potential leaching. Manganese is an essential trace mineral that is needed in small amounts for overall health, but too much can be harmful. It was detected at the 0.02 ppm notification level of the OEHHA but below the 0.1 ppm guideline released by the MN Dept. of Health. Silver, on the other hand, was detected at a 10x lower concentration than the EPA guideline (0.1 ppm); while excess silver does not pose any health risk, elevated levels can still cause undesirable cosmetic effects (skin discoloration and graying of the whites of the eyes). 

In 2025, we also found antimony (0.0015 ppm) and zinc (0.0479 ppm) in our filtered water that was not present in the unfiltered water. At 0.0015 ppm, antimony was present above the strictest health guideline of 0.001 ppm per the OEHHA, which is concerning. Zinc is merely an aesthetic impurity which only becomes relevant (e.g., impacting water taste) at a ~100x higher level (5 ppm) than detected in our sample per the EPA secondary standards.

Remineralization Results

In our 2024 lab testing, we measured 1.94 ppm magnesium and 0.85 ppm calcium post-filtration, neither of which were within their respective WHO health guidelines (minimum 10 ppm, optimal 20-30 ppm for magnesium and minimum 20 ppm, optimal ~50 ppm for calcium). While magnesium increased compared to the non-remineralized RO systems we tested (average of 0.50 ppm magnesium), calcium was lower relative to the non-remineralized systems (average of 2.00 ppm calcium). Overall, this reflects limited or possibly even no mineral restoration for these substances, respectively.

Similarly, in our 2025 lab testing, we measured 2.5 ppm magnesium and 0.367 ppm calcium post-filtration, neither of which were within the aforementioned WHO guidelines. While magnesium increased relative to the non-remineralized RO systems we tested (0.11123 ppm magnesium), calcium was once again lower (0.47253 ppm calcium), reflecting poor mineral restoration overall.

Post-remineralization pH essentially was unchanged at 7.02 in 2024 (compared to an average of 7.03 for non-remineralized systems) and increased to 7.4 in 2025 (6.72 average for non-remineralized ROs). Alkalinity rose to 20 ppm in 2024 – still below the IDPH-recommended range of 30–400 ppm – but higher than the <20 ppm average of non-remineralized systems. In 2025, alkalinity was 12 ppm – higher than the 2.2 ppm average for non-remineralized ROs, but again below the WHO-recommendation.

Note that elevated pH should not be interpreted as an indicator of adequate mineral content in general. For the Frizzlife in particular, the mineral cartridge minimally improved buffering capacity and taste-related parameters but did not meaningfully restore essential minerals to health-recommended levels.

That said, our remineralization lab results represent a standardized, worst-case scenario designed to reflect the shortest possible contact time between purified RO water and remineralization media, ensuring consistency across all tested systems. Additional testing using TDS meters and extended contact times showed considerably higher TDS levels, suggesting increased mineral dissolution under those conditions. This minimal-contact approach may therefore underrepresent real-world remineralization performance.

In the Frizzlife, water is remineralized inline before dispensing. A small amount of purified water remains in and around the internal mineral cartridge after each use. If the unit sits idle, that water stays in contact with the media longer, which may allow additional mineral dissolution.

Users who dispense small amounts at a time and allow the system to rest between uses may therefore see somewhat higher mineral levels than observed under our minimal-contact lab conditions. In contrast, dispensing larger volumes at once results in shorter contact time and performance closer to our test results.

We did not measure the cartridge’s internal retention volume, so while real-world mineral levels may exceed our lab findings under certain usage patterns, the extent of that increase remains unknown.

Lab Results Charts

2. NSF/ANSI Certifications and Other Test Data

The Frizzlife has no NSF/ANSI certifications for contaminant reduction, nor does it have any third-party testing for contaminant removal.

3. Filtration Process

We have 2 filter cartridges which comprise 4 filtration stages:

• Stages 1+2 are performed by a composite filter (activated carbon + RO membrane). Activated carbon removes things like bad tastes and odors, chlorine/chloramine, disinfection byproducts and other organics, as well as certain metals. By removing chlorine and other contaminants, this filter component protects the RO membrane from damage. The RO membrane then uses reverse osmosis to effectively remove the vast majority of contaminants and minerals.
• Stages 3+4 are performed by the composite activated carbon + alkalinization post-filter. The carbon acts as a polishing stage to remove lingering bad tastes/odors and VOCs. The alkalinization component restores minerals, raises the pH to prevent acidity and boosts the water’s flavor. Notably, Frizzlife does not indicate what materials comprise the alkalinization post-filter, so it is unclear which mineral(s) may be restored.

4. Taste and Odor Tests

In both our 2024 and 2025 tests, the filtered water was odorless and had a perfectly clean taste.

Usability: 3.60/5.00

The Frizzlife achieved a usability score of 3.60/5.00, based on its performance in the following categories:

1. Initial system assembly including filter priming (0.80/0.80)
2. Everyday use (2.30/3.70)
3. Filter replacements (0.50/0.50)

1. Initial Setup: 0.80/0.80

Assembling the Frizzlife is easy. In addition to clear, illustrated directions in the user manual, there is a tutorial video on YouTube.

Here’s a quick breakdown of the setup procedure:

1. Take off the filter cover. Install the FCR filter (composite activated carbon + RO membrane) by pushing in and turning it clockwise to lock in place. Insert the SC post-filter (activated carbon + alkalinization), pushing all the way in.
2. Install the pitcher and drip tray.
3. Remove and fill the feed water tank with tap water. Place it back securely on the unit.
4. Plug the power cord into an electrical outlet. The system will start to filter water, with the “Filtering” light on.
5. When the “Filtering” light goes off, the pure water pitcher is full. Remove and discard the filtered water in the pitcher.
6. Reinstall the pitcher and the system will automatically start filtering water again.
7. Repeat steps 4-6 until the “Change Water” indicator flashes.
8. Discard the wastewater in the feed tank, refill with tap water, and reinstall on the unit.
9. Steps 3-8 constitute one cycle of flushing. Repeat the flushing process a total of 3-5 times.
10. Now your system is ready to use.

2. Day-to-Day Use: 2.30/3.70

2.1 Speed & Water Capacity: 1.20/1.40

The Frizzlife is well-suited for daily use. Its carafe, though small, stores water for later – up to ~6.6 cups (~0.41 gal). Consequently, you can fill a 40-oz bottle on a single refill all in one pour – no need to refill the feed tank in-between or wait for additional cycles of water processing. In fact, you may choose to pour from the carafe or dispense straight into your glass or 40-oz bottle – ours fit under the spout without tilting.

That said, you can’t fit a standard 2-quart carafe under the spout, as its height is only 9.4” from the base. The included carafe is also too small to accommodate 2 quarts. However, you could still dispense this volume without needing to refill the ~1.22 gallon feed tank in between.

More specifically and based on a full feed tank, in our test the Frizzlife dispensed 58 oz of ambient water with one button press before stopping. However, this system dispenses water by drawing it from the carafe. In our test, there was still 10 oz left in the carafe, which we could use to top up our pitcher. Consequently, we estimate you can obtain a maximum of 68 oz of ambient water in one go before the system needs time to process additional water.

We also investigated how much ambient filtered water could be produced from one full feed tank, regardless of how much time or how many button pushes it took to fully process and dispense this entire volume. For the Frizzlife, this maximum volume was 116 oz (14.5 cups). Assuming 25.5 cups or 31.5 cups of daily water consumption for the average US and US-family households, respectively, and 14.5 cups filtered water per full feed tank, we estimate 2-3 daily refills – below-average to average for the countertop ROs we tested.

In addition, the Frizzlife filters fast enough to meet the daily water needs of the average-sized US households, and it can handle thirst bursts. In our ambient water speed tests, it could dispense 1 or 4 cups instantly when the water was pre-processed, meaning the feed tank was filled and allowed to filter its water first. This is because we are pouring directly from a full carafe – no wait time for water processing needed. However, if dispensing directly into a glass, it is relatively slow – it took 32.5 sec for 1 cup in our test. Fortunately, its volume presets mitigate the slower dispensing speed. Upon refilling, it took 4:20 min to dispense 4 cups of water.

2.2 Dispensing: 0.70/1.00

Dispensing water is easy using the intuitive and responsive touch screen. Plus, you may choose between dispensing straight into a glass or pouring from the carafe – both done without splashing.

This system has three volume presets (4, 8, or 17 oz) to choose from, or you can dispense a custom volume. There’s also a magnetic drip tray to catch any overflow – especially helpful as there’s a slight delay when you stop the dispense which takes some getting used to.

The carafe has a comfortable handle, slides in and out of the base easily, and provides a smooth stream, even when pouring fast.

2.3 Refilling & Size: 0.10/0.70

We found refilling the Frizzlife to be challenging. The lid of the feed water tank is also the carrying handle, making it very awkward to remove, refill (the lid gets in the way of water pouring in), and place back on the base. That said, it does have a max fill line on the feed tank.

It’s also simple to keep track of when it’s time to empty the wastewater and refill the feed tank, as the system has a water shortage/change indicator light on the display.

Measuring 9″x14.8″x16.5″ (WxHxD), it fits under standard height (18”) kitchen cabinets, and at 17 lbs, it’s lighter than average across the countertop ROs we tested. Its footprint is bigger compared to the other tested systems, occupying 148.5 in2 (~1.03 ft2), and at 9” wide it is not streamlined enough to fit in narrow spaces.

2.4 Other: 0.30/0.60

The Frizzlife provides TDS readings of the filtered water, which we found to be accurate within 5 ppb of a separate TDS meter. It’s also outfitted with a water quality indicator that turns red if the filtered water is over 24 hours old, alerting you that the water in the carafe has become stagnant and needs to be discarded.

The presence of a portable plastic carafe that also fits in the fridge further increased its usability score in our analysis.

3. Filter Replacements: 0.50/0.50

Filter replacements are easy and convenient. There are only two filters to replace and they are easily accessible in the front of the unit. One twists in/out and the other pushes in/out.

The two filter change indicator lights on the control panel alert you when it is time to change each filter. Rated life for the composite filter is 900-1,000 gal or 12 months – given the lack of NSF/ANSI certifications or comprehensive third-party testing, we feel a 6-month lifespan may be more realistic and a safer choice – and the composite post-filter is 3 months.

Assuming 500 gallons of yearly water consumption for the average household, we predict the frequency of your filter changes will be dictated by filter age rather than water consumption. Therefore, expect to replace them every 3-12 months as indicated.

Costs: 4.17/5.00

Based on value for money, the Frizzlife achieved a cost score of 4.17 out of 5.00, indicating it is priced below average for what it offers compared to competing systems (a score of 4.00 represents average value). Notably, while its upfront price is slightly below average, its annual filter replacement costs are about average for the countertop RO systems we tested.

1. Upfront Price

As of November 4, 2025, the Frizzlife WB99-C is priced at $389.99. Using our discount code, you can save $130, reducing the upfront cost to $259.99. This is slightly below the $321.89 average across all the countertop RO systems we tested.

2. Long-Term Expenses for Filter Replacements

Based on 500 gallons consumption and a 900-1,000-gal or 12-month filter life (composite filter) or 3-month filter life (composite post-filter), we estimate $103 in annual filter replacement costs, which is well below the $149.47 average across all tested systems.

However, given the lack of long-term contaminant testing or NSF/ANSI certifications, replacing the composite filter at least twice yearly might be a safer choice, which would bring annual filter costs to $153 per year – about average across the tested countertop ROs.

3. Product Warranty

The system is covered by a 1-year (1.5-year) warranty.

4. Other Cost Factors

• TDS monitoring provides accurate TDS measurements of the filtered water.
• Water quality indicator: helps prevent stagnation of filtered water in the clean-water carafe.
• Cover to prevent algae growth.

Additional

1. Pure-to-Drain Ratio Tests

We measured a pure-to-drain ratio of ~1:0.30 (2024) and ~1:0.34 (2025), which is very low wastewater for RO systems in general and better than the average ~1:0.61 across the countertop RO systems we tested.

2. Construction

The Frizzlife feels sturdy and well-built, including the plastic carafe.

3. Flushing Options

This system performs automatic RO membrane flushing before and after each filtration cycle for 10 seconds. When the carafe is full, it will also flush for about a minute after changing the water; it also flushes two times every two minutes during water production.

You can also manually flush the system at any time with the manual flush option. This is helpful if you want to completely empty the internal clean water tank, or if you want to flush the system after not having used it for a while.

While flushing counters TDS creep and extends RO membrane life, it may also waste water.

4. Algae-Prevention Cover

This system comes with a cover that claims to prevent green algae growth, which the manufacturer states is likely to happen if the unit is in direct sunlight.

5. Frequent Customer Complaints

There are not that many customer reviews of the Frizzlife currently.

We did not experience issues with the unit during our testing apart from the considerations discussed above.

Bottom Line: No Match for Better-Performing Systems (3.76/5.00)

Filtration weighted at 60%, and usability and cost at 20% each, the Frizzlife WB99-C scored a final rating of 3.76 out of 5.00.

In other words, it ranked toward the bottom of the group. While it removed most contaminants in our 2024/2025 lab tests, applies remineralization, and produced odorless, clean-tasting water, it also showed evidence of potential antimony leaching above the strictest health guidelines in 2025. Plus, this system has no NSF/ANSI-certified contaminants or third-party testing.

It’s fairly easy to setup and maintain, with simple filter changes and filter replacement indicators. The small carafe provides some instantly accessible water, fits in the fridge, and the water quality indicator reminds you to discard its contents 24 hours post-filtration to prevent stagnation. Plus, feed water TDS monitoring is a nice extra.

However, while there is a feed tank status indicator, it’s hard to remove, refill and replace, as its lid doubles as the carrying handle, and despite the responsive touchscreen, it still takes a moment for the pour to stop. That said, it’s still fast enough for most households, with volume presets somewhat offsetting slow dispensing speeds, and it requires average to below-average refills for a countertop RO.

Finally, though the Frizzlife WB99-C feels well-built, wastes very little water, and is reasonably priced with low upfront and average ongoing costs, overall we think there are better countertop ROs out there.

(Use Code BOSWB2410 for $130 Off!)