Ikea Valevåg mattress review: a brilliant budget buy or too cheap for comfort?
My expectations for the Ikea Valevåg were, to be polite, limited. Ikea's mattress is less than a fifth of the price of a Simba Hybrid Pro – but somehow comes with the same 10-year guarantee. Seriously? Expecting a decade's worth of blissful sleeps from a Valevåg sounds like an attempt to wear the same £8 Primark jumper every day until 2035.
But when I tested the Valevåg alongside several more expensive rivals, I realised it's not the mattress equivalent of fast-fashion tat. Its price belies a well-constructed product with pocket springs that provide consistent support and snoozable comfort. It can't compare with the pricey Simba or the best-in-show Otty Original Hybrid for ergonomic cosiness, but it's a brilliant buy for a guest room or a young person's bedroom.
To make sure, I enlisted the help of my 22-year-old niece, Alex, in testing the Valevåg. Her reluctance to give it to charity after two months of sleeping on it – sorry Alex, them's the rules at the Filter – reassured me that it's a genuine bargain and not a false economy destined for landfill.
View at Ikea
***
I took delivery of a medium-firm Ikea Valevåg in a double size in December. I shared it with my husband for three nights before delegating responsibilities to Alex, who slept on it for two months. Together with other family members, we rated its firmness and overall comfort side by side against five other mattresses, and I ran lab-style tests to measure factors such as sinkage, edge support and heat retention. You can read more about our mattress testing exploits here.
***
View at Ikea
The Valevåg is one of seven sprung mattresses made by Ikea. It falls roughly in the middle on price, costing from £149 for a single to £359 for a super king, all available in firm or medium-firm tension. The double size I tested costs £219.
The Ikea is the only pocket sprung mattress I've tested so far. All the others are hybrid mattresses that contain multiple layers of memory foam and springs. It does have an upper layer of polyurethane foam, which I measured to be 5cm deep, but with a density of 33kg/cu.m, it's not elastic enough to be classed as memory foam. Instead, it's 'reflex foam' and adds much-needed resistance and support above the springs. It also helps to create a flat sleeping surface beneath the polyester fabric cover, which isn't removable.
Under the foam layer, the Valevåg has 249 steel springs per square metre, adding up to about 640 in a double size. Each spring is wrapped in a fabric pocket to help it move independently and isolate motion – in other words, so the whole thing doesn't bounce too much when you move around in bed. There's also a layer of felt below the springs to help maintain the mattress's structure.
At 24cm deep, the Valevåg is the thinnest mattress I've tested, and this has a couple of advantages. First, it's much lighter than the chunky hybrids. Moving it up and down stairs on my own still took effort, but it's much easier to manoeuvre than its more luxurious counterparts. It's also perfect for a standard fitted sheet – a relief after I failed to squeeze my sheets on to the likes of the 31cm-thick Origin Hybrid Pro.
Related: How to choose a mattress: the features worth paying for – and the ones that aren't
Ikea's mattress would be relatively easy to flip over, but you don't have to. The Valevåg has a distinct top (sleeping) side and bottom side, more like a hybrid than a conventional sprung mattress. Instead of flipping, rotate it 180 degrees every few months to prevent indentations where you sleep.
Ikea's description of the Valevåg as 'medium-firm' is spot on. My family scored it an average 6.8/10 for firmness, similar to the Simba Hybrid Pro. In my lab tests, the Valevåg sank a maximum of 34mm under 7.5kg of weight – closer to the softest mattress I've tested (the Eve Wunderflip Hybrid, which sank 40mm) than the firmest (the Origin Hybrid Pro, a mere 18mm). Both these mattresses are advertised as medium-firm, too.
You can test the Valevåg's firmness at Ikea, but bear in mind that many other shoppers may have had a go before you, with a softening effect over time. If you'd rather test your own new version, Ikea gives you a 365-night free trial. Keep it in good condition with a mattress protector if you hope to avail yourself of the refund offer.
***
Type: pocket sprungFirmness: advertised as medium firm, panel rated as 6.8/10Depth: 24cmCover: not removableTurn or rotate: not neededTrial period: 365 nightsWarranty: 10 yearsOld mattress recycling: £40 via the Mattress Recycling PeopleSustainability credentials: 2025 target of 20% recycled content in all Ikea mattress foams
***
I expected my Valevåg to arrive fully expanded and ready for napping on, but Ikea has adopted the vacuum-roll packing style initiated by online 'bed-in-a-box' companies such as Otty. This means it's machine-compressed in the factory, then wrapped tightly in metres of plastic to stop it from expanding en route to your door.
My mattress was delivered by Ikea's own team, a nice change from the third-party couriers that handled my other test samples. Delivery took only three days, and Ikea kept me informed with text alerts, a four-hour window and a link to track the driver on a map. Unwrapping the Valevåg was marginally easier than the other roll-wrapped mattresses because there was no cardboard box, but the thick layers of plastic were, as ever, a pain to remove. Scissors are essential, as is a careful hand to prevent damage to the mattress.
The mattress emerged from its wrapping looking quite flat, but it took much less time than its hybrid rivals to expand to full size. Ikea recommends you allow 72 hours for your mattress to fill out, but mine rose to the occasion within a day and a half, and its relative shortage of foam content meant that any 'off-gassing' chemical smell was reassuringly brief.
***
View at Ikea
There's plenty to love about the Valevåg: value for money, easy manoeuvrability, plump supportiveness and unpretentious composition (does a mattress really need eight layers of variously dense memory foam, infused with graphite and bamboo?). The key to a successful mattress, though, is good sleep – and my sleep tester had few complaints here.
I spent a few nights on the Valevåg before handing over to my niece, Alex. I was used to sleeping on the Simba Hybrid Pro and then the Otty Original Hybrid, both superb high-end mattresses, so I was spoiled. It took me longer to get to sleep on the Ikea, and my husband and I were more aware of our movements. However, it offered consistent support and a degree of comfort that belied its price.
Alex was even more impressed. You might expect a 22-year-old drama student to be unfussy about mattress quality, but during our initial family mattress-rating session, Alex worried that the Valevåg wouldn't be firm enough for her. Once the sleeping began, however, she liked its overall body support, which was balanced by enough 'give' for her hips and shoulders when lying on her side. She also praised the reflex foam layer, which made her feel 'lifted up, not sinking in the middle' – and bounced back when pressed. Mattresses containing a lot of memory foam can soften significantly in their first year or so, but this is unlikely to happen with the pocket sprung Valevåg.
The breathability of the surface and pocket springs proved a hit. Alex had voiced her dislike of the 'moist spongy' feel of foamy mattresses, such as the Eve Wunderflip Hybrid, but found the Ikea 'more naturally bed-like', and this helped her sleep well on it from the first night. In my heat-retention tests, it cooled down faster than any mattress other than the pricier Panda Hybrid Bamboo, which is specifically designed to stay cool. The Valevåg would be a great choice if you experience night sweats or struggle to sleep on warm nights.
Two months is not enough to judge a mattress's durability, but we had our ways. We walked all over the Valevåg to see if the springs would give way (don't try this at home – it invalidates many warranties), but it remained robust and supportive, with no twangs. There was no sagging in the sleeping surface after two months.
***
When I slept on the Valevåg, I could feel the difference between it and the more expensive hybrids. It's firm enough, but it doesn't offer much ergonomic pushback. The combination of memory foam and springs in the Otty and Simba makes you feel powerfully supported in all the right places, and that's worth paying for if you need to improve your sleep quality and reduce aches and pains.
Alex had no trouble sleeping on the Valevåg, but she does enjoy reading in bed for hours on end, and it didn't fully support the concentrated weight of her bottom when sitting up. Edge support is shaky, too. It doesn't completely give way when you sit on the side, but it would benefit from high-density foam around its perimeter. Another weak spot is motion isolation, so it wouldn't be a relaxing choice if you share your bed with a restless partner.
Related: Otty Original Hybrid mattress review: the best hybrid mattress you can buy – and also one of the cheapest
The fabric cover isn't removable for washing in the machine, which is a pity because it gets dirty easily. My cat Iggy sees test mattresses as giant scratching posts, and the Valevåg's claw marks are more visible than any others. Our walking on the Valevåg didn't seem to do much damage, but the easy wear and tear of the outside makes me wonder how robust the inside is.
***
Compressing mattresses for delivery means they use less space in the warehouse and van. With more than 12m mattresses sold by Ikea every year, the resulting decrease in transport emissions must be significant. However, I wouldn't call it a sustainability win. The amount of plastic involved is enormous and doesn't feel justified, although that's true for all the mattresses I've tested.
Doorstep recycling services generally don't collect soft plastic, so we had to take it to the local refuse and recycling centre to dispose of ours responsibly. Having to do this for every mattress I tested was a chore, but most customers will only have to deal with the plastic from one mattress at a time.
The Valevåg's steel springs, polypropylene pockets and polyester fabric are widely recycled, although again, you'd have to get them to a suitable recycling hub. The non-biodegradable polyurethane 'reflex foam' layer is more environmentally challenging. As with most mattress-makers, Ikea will collect and recycle your old mattress (whether or not it's an Ikea), and its £40 charge is fairly typical. I was impressed by the extent of information Ikea publishes about this process, including how each component is recycled or repurposed.
Mattress recycling is just one of the services Ikea offers as part of its green goals, which are set in line with the UN's Sustainable Development Goals for 2030. Others include using zero-emissions vehicles for more than 90% of home deliveries by 2028, electrical recycling, and a platform for reselling your preloved Ikea furniture – although mattresses are excluded from this.
***
The Valevåg is unarguably a brilliant buy. Its 10-year guarantee and 365-day free trial show that Ikea has confidence in its durability, although we'd recommend using a protective cover or three. This is no ergonomic, orthopaedic wonder mattress, but at a squeak over £200, it provides more than your money's worth of support, comfort and good sleep.
View at Ikea
***
Jane Hoskyn is a freelance consumer journalist and WFH pioneer with three decades of experience in rearranging bookshelves and 'testing' coffee machines while deadlines loom. Her work has made her a low-key expert in all manner of consumables, from sports watches to solar panels. She would always rather be in the woods
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
IKEA opening new style of store around 20 miles from Modesto. How it'll work
IKEA has announced that it will open a store in Manteca with a new format — called a Plan and Order Point. This new format creates a 'meeting point' where customers can get support from IKEA design experts to plan and order furniture for their kitchen, bedroom, bathroom or living room, according to a news release. Customers will be unable to take products home the same day, but can arrange for delivery or schedule orders to be picked up from the Manteca store. Plan and Order Point stores are part of IKEA's growth strategy. The idea is to create more ways to meet customers where they are and how they like to shop, the release said. 'For their beloved meatballs and other IKEA food offerings, customers will still need to make a trip to IKEA West Sacramento,' the news release reads. IKEA Manteca will be located in The Promenade Shops at Orchard Valley, a shopping center that also houses Bass Pro Shops. It's scheduled to open November 2025.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
IKEA expands to Manteca with new Plan & Order point in 2025
( — The IKEA family is welcoming its fourth Northern California store in Manteca, which is set to open in 2025. On Thursday, IKEA officials announced plans for a new Plan and Order point with pickup expected in 2025. Officials stated that this new customer meeting point will be located in the Promenade shops at Orchard Valley, promising to bring a fresh experience to the metro area. 'We are thrilled to offer residents of the Greater Sacramento Area more ways to shop and experience IKEA!' said Javier Quiñones, CEO & Chief Sustainability Officer of IKEA U.S. 'This new location highlights our commitment to making IKEA more accessible and affordable, bringing our home furnishing products and solutions closer to the community.' Charges filed against former Cal Fire employee in child pornography case The Plan and Order is a new store format that is part of IKEA's growing strategy to increase accessibility for the brand and ensure there are more ways to meet customers where they are and how they like to shop, according to IKEA officials. They explained that this differs from their traditional IKEA format, like the one located in West Sacramento. This version of the store allows customers a chance to meet with team members to plan and order home furnishing solutions that require a bit more assistance, such as kitchens, bedrooms and bathrooms. The new location will be situated at 1422 Grove Avenue in the Promenade Shops at Orchard Valley, an outdoor lifestyle retail center encompassing 2600 square feet of leased retail space, officials said. If customers in the Stockton – Lodi – Tracy metropolitan area want to enjoy the famous IKEA meatballs, they must make a trip to the West Sacramento location, as this new spot focuses on providing the community with access to affordability and convenience, according to officials. IKEA currently has three locations in Northern California: West Sacramento, San Francisco, and Palo Alto. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
This Platform Was Supposed to Replace Twitter. It's Not Going So Well.
Sign up for the Slatest to get the most insightful analysis, criticism, and advice out there, delivered to your inbox daily. For a different perspective on what's happening with Bluesky, check out our colleague Luke Winkie's piece here. Bluesky's big breakthrough as an alternative to the Elon Muskified Twitter was seven months ago. It hasn't lasted. Or, at least, its enormous growth right after Donald Trump's reelection has not kept up. The site got a surge of new sign-ups almost immediately after the election and, shortly after the inauguration, crossed 30 million accounts. But user growth has slowed, with the site now at about 36.5 million accounts, and it appears that more and more of those accounts are becoming ghosts as users abandon the platform. Unique posters and unique likers of posts have been in steady downward descent for months. Though Bluesky has more users now than after the election, it is a smaller, less active digital community. Bigger than 2023, when it was accessible only via invitation code, but not quite big. Both of us, Alex and Nitish, have made Bluesky our primary microblogging app. Choosing it was a big commitment for two people whose brains are infected with an insatiable appetite to post and read posts. For us, Bluesky has supplanted X. But most people have not made that move, and because they haven't, they may not be familiar with Bluesky's favorite topic: Bluesky. For weeks, one of the site's most popular conversation topics has been why more people aren't using it. Theories abound, and we think that the most popular one—that Bluesky's lack of traction has to do with a tilt toward liberal users—misses the point. There's not one exact answer, but after several hundred hours each (yikes!) scrolling and posting on the platform, we have a few ideas about what's happening to the most promising X competitor. We're now prepared to share this conversation with you so that you, too, can enter the arena. Alex Kirshner: Nitish! You have been wasting your time primarily on Bluesky, rather than X, for half a year now. How would you say your digital life has changed? Nitish Pahwa: Alex! It's certainly been interesting. I'm a longtime Bluesky adopter, going back to the referral-code days, but after I fully quit X postelection, I made it my microblog of choice, especially as more ex-Xers joined. That was a phenomenal surge, and not only did it help to populate the site (my God, those early days were desolate), but it brought so many users with interests beyond niche tech and politics stuff—pop culture, basketball, comedy, etc. We even got a few random but fun celebrities who are still posting, like Flavor Flav and Mina Kimes and even the Portland Trail Blazers. That burst of excitement has settled down a bit, and I'm both nervous and uncertain about what comes next. I've found a lot of pure joy on the platform, connected with new folks, and curated lists for myself to make the most of the experience. But Bluesky does feel like the concentration of old #Resistance Twitter, conjoined with a dash of Facebook refugees. That is exactly the cocktail we're talking about, accounting for a solid majority of everyday users. It can certainly be exhausting; I know people who've dropped out after finding that none of their nonpolitics articles or posts ever really take off (much as I've tried to help out). And it hasn't yet become the Live experience that was so essential to old Twitter. Things did get poppin' during the Jake Paul–Mike Tyson fight, the GNX drop, and the Super Bowl, especially the halftime show. But it's few and far between, and it's not yet been enough to distract from the more grating aspects of the feed. Do you find yourself missing X, then? I don't, though I have a burner there for moments like the Elon–Trump scrape. (As an aside: It's also funny to me how people still pretend that X is a bustling town square. We all knew that Twitter was shedding users long before Elon took over! And X is still losing tweeters who aren't on alternative networks. But anyway.) I've overall appreciated Bluesky and still think there's potential here, but I also understand why people have dropped off, and that doesn't feel great. But I'm curious about your thoughts. Bluesky has the thing I want most: a nice community of a few thousand people ('my mutuals') who riff about sports and TV and seem to want to live in a better world. Plus, it doesn't have the thing I want least: blue-check-marked accounts replying to links to my Slate stories with: 'Hmm, Kirshner. Interesting last name. Jew?' These things should be the foundation of a delightful social media experience. But I don't think they have been, and I've been trying to unpack why I often feel madder after scrolling than I ever did on Twitter. Please psychoanalyze me. I don't think you're alone there! Unfortunately, the jokes are far outweighed by the solemnity. My friend Ashwin Rodrigues wrote a sharp piece about this headlined 'Bluesky Can't Take a Joke'—the reaction to which, naturally, all but proved his point. It's not just an honest-to-goodness New York Times reporter telling Chris Hayes that he's spreading misinfo for re-skeeting(?) a clearly mocked-up NYT screenshot; it's people who can't even comprehend why Bluesky should also be a place where people can enjoy themselves, even though American democracy is crumbling, etc. Some Bluesky users don't seem to want that kind of bifurcation. There are periodic viral posts to the effect of 'How are you posting about Andor while American-made bombs fall on Gaza?' Or last week's viral moments of various Bluesky users telling people that the Trump–Musk meltdown was 'a distraction' or that it was misogynistic to joke that 'the girls are fighting.' And those are outlier takes that most users find ridiculous, but I suspect they've contributed to a collective bad rep. It's always this sort of post that I see working its way onto X or Instagram in the context of making fun of Bluesky. Ken White had a good observation: that critics 'have an exaggerated expectation of Twitter alternatives, imposing norms of decorum, civility, productivity, etc. that they absolutely do not impose on Twitter.' I do appreciate so many of the people on Bluesky, who help me feel so much less insane these days when it comes to reckoning with Democratic cowardice, A.I. hucksters, and bullshit punditry. But, even though it's less algorithm-centric than so many other platforms, it falls into the rage-bait trap that comes for all social media. The most engaged users are also the ones likeliest to boost and reshare the same bad news you heard just hours ago, to ask why you're not weighing in on every little injustice that lands hour after hour, and to repost up a storm of the most depressing shit you've ever seen—and they're also the least likely to converse with you when you just wanna talk about Shoreline Mafia's return. Social media incentives, man. Elon Musk started literally paying people to post on X, proportional to how often their posts got seen. Bluesky does nothing like that, but because it's a platform full of people who are either sad, angry, or desperate about the state of the world, the kinds of posts that proliferate around that platform are mostly not fun posts. There's no Bluesky virality for quote-posting a pic of Timothée Chalamet and the Jenners at a Knicks game. And I don't know if a million screenshots of executive orders have made me a better citizen. This weekend was a perfect exhibit of all the crisscrossing tensions we've been identifying here. On one hand, you had a decent amount of folks posting about significant cultural events, in sports (the French Open, the NBA Finals) and even theater (the Good Night, and Good Luck livestream, the Tony Awards). But that all ran headlong into the political horrors we saw erupt at the same time, like the militant federal crackdown on the pro-immigrant protesters in L.A., and Israel's interception of the Madleen aid flotilla. Frankly, I'm not sure any social media—much less an underresourced startup whose leaders prioritize steady operation over far-flung growth—is equipped to handle these clashes of reality right now. I wonder how many of us are subliminally expecting that a social media site can do that, if for no other reason than social media is where people spend time and consume news. I don't think that Bluesky can, or should, be the space for the public to actually organize and act against democratic crisis. But when it comes to the basic function—understanding what's all happening in the world right now—I'd much rather have Bluesky over the alternatives. Christopher Mims, from the Wall Street Journal, made the point over the weekend that 'on X it's 'LA is burning; deport them all.' ' Smug X-ers love to say Bluesky is a bubble that fences off libs from reality, but frankly, we're now seeing all their skewed misrepresentations of what's happening in L.A. translating into mainstream coverage! And, look, I can scroll past stupidity on Bluesky , but on X it's very likely I'm just going to see Substackers raging nonstop over an account full of cherry-picked Bluesky screenshots. Like, the critics of Bluesky would have much stronger points if they … knew what the platform is actually like, both its strengths and weaknesses? My eyes roll into the back of my head when people, like this Washington Post columnist, assess that Bluesky's problem is that it's a liberal bubble that lacks a diversity of views. People fight on Bluesky all the time. They fight with each other over politics. They pick fights with media organizations, including us at Slate. They pick fights with Bluesky's moderation team, in an old-school Twitter way. The platform has a significant left-of-center bent, and I wouldn't claim that it's never hive-minded into a wrong conclusion. But, God, have you ever seen Twitter hive-mind something? It turns out that when groups of people think, sometimes they will groupthink. And unlike X, Bluesky isn't algorithmically tilting the political discourse in one direction. Bluesky does have big structural problems related to politics. The same genre of events that drove people to the platform in the first place (eroding norms, human suffering in all its forms, the chance to litigate Kamala Harris' campaign strategy) is all that many people want to talk about. But my Bluesky experience isn't lacking because I'm surrounded by liberals and leftists. It's lacking because there are roughly 14 people there with whom I can bitch about the Pittsburgh Pirates, compared to hundreds on X. (Though it feels, for some reason, as if Bluesky really does adore tennis?) The platform needs more people posting about more things. I think what we should care about is that a substantive platform even exists that encourages dialogue over A.I. slop, that encourages people to share their original work, that doesn't drown out their conversation with unmoderated and arbitrary racism. After Elon's takeover, X lost all value to me as a journalistic resource—for finding sources and reliable information and for getting my pieces out there. I'm not the only one whose engagement there fell off quite starkly as Musk tweaked the algorithm to downplay tweets with links and boost all the $8 blue-check buyers and their slop instead. Outlets as varied as Wired and McSweeney's have explicitly credited Bluesky with reviving their engagement and audience sources in the post-Twitter, post-Facebook age. I think that should be what the platform leans in to—offering a way for creators to find healthier exposure and routes to audience building again, instead of selling their soul for a video on X that'll get downranked as soon as you start casting doubt on the reality of 'white genocide.' I mean, let's be frank: The audience for microblogging and text-based content is smaller than it used to be. But what Bluesky's very existence has proved is that there is still firm demand for this style of media and that it holds for so many people with all kinds of interests—Rap Twitter, NBA Twitter, Lit Twitter, etc. Honestly, I think the fact that its critics feel the need to shit on it is just proof positive! But, dear God, we need more fun and more shitposters. Let this be my call to all you jokesters out there: Please join us. Let's talk about Not News and crack esoteric riffs. I'll boost you every single time, I promise. Part of the challenge here is that Twitter, at its best, was like a giant state university. It could be all things to all comers, which was a rare trick, and it was as big or as small as you wanted it to be. It had every student club imaginable. Bluesky is more of a small liberal arts college, and look: Oberlin has its advantages over Ohio State. I bet the dorms are nicer, and not everyone needs to go to a school with a zillion people, many of whom are deranged. (Shoutout to my Ohio State football pals.) But I do think that when some kind of annoying kid from Greek life shows up on the Bluesky quad one day, users there should go out of their way to tell him to bring his friends. Speaking as a state university grad: absolutely.