Purpose: To examine the validity of SenseWear Pro(2) Armband in assessing energy cost of physical activities in children, and to contribute with values of energy costs in an over-view of physical activities in children. Methods: Energy cost was assessed by SenseWear Pro(2) Armband in 20 healthy children, 11-13 yr, while lying down resting, sitting playing games on mobile phone, stepping up and down on a step board, bicycling on a stationary bike, jumping on a trampoline, playing basketball, and walking/running on a treadmill at the speeds 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 10 km center dot h(-1). During these activities, energy cost was also assessed from VO2 and VCO2 measured by Oxycon Mobile portable metabolic system, which was used as criterion method. Results: The difference in energy cost between SenseWear Pro(2) Armband and Oxycon Mobile was -0.7 (0.5) (P < 0.001) for resting, -2.0 (0.9) (P < 0.001) for playing games on mobile phone, -6.6 (2.3) (P < 0.001) for stepping on the step board, -12.0 (3.7) (P < 0.001) for bicycling, -2.7 (11.9) (P = 0.34) for jumping on the trampoline, and -14.8 (6.4) kJ center dot min(-1) (P < 0.001) for playing basketball. The difference in energy cost between SenseWear Pro(2) Armband and Oxycon Mobile for increasing treadmill speed was 1.3 (3.1) (P = 0.048), 0.1 (2.9) (P = 0.82), -1.2 (2.6) (P = 0.049), -1.6 (3.2) (P = 0.044), -3.1 (3.7) (P = 0.0013), -4.9 (3.7) (P < 0.001), -5.3 (3.7) (P < 0.001), and -11.1 (3.5) kJ center dot min(-1) (P < 0.001). Conclusions: SenseWear Pro(2) Armband underestimated energy cost of most activities in this study, an underestimation that increased with increased physical activity intensity. A table of energy costs (MET values) of physical activities in children measured by indirect calorimetry is presented as an initiation of the creation of a compendium of physical activities in children.