Background: Consumer hearing technologies are increasingly positioned as accessible alternatives to conventional hearing care. Apple’s AirPods Pro integrate a Hearing Test Feature (HTF) and Over-the-Counter Hearing Aid Feature (OTC-HAF) intended to support hearing self-assessment and hearing aid self-fitting. However, independent evidence evaluating the accuracy, reliability, and efficiency of the HTF, the usability and performance of the OTC-HAF, and their clinical effectiveness compared with conventional hearing care remains limited. Methods: Three studies evaluated Apple’s hearing features, including two completed studies and an ongoing randomized controlled trial (RCT). Studies 1 and 2 were conducted in the same sample of 25 adults with self-perceived mild-to-moderate hearing loss. Study 1 was a cross-sectional validation study assessing the accuracy, test–retest reliability, and time efficiency of the Apple AirPods Pro 2 HTF compared with pure-tone audiometry (PTA). Study 2 evaluated the usability and laboratory performance of the OTC-HAF among digitally literate iPhone users. Outcomes included usability, hearing aid handling skills, sound quality, speech-in-noise performance, and real-ear measurements. Study 3 is an ongoing randomized 2×2 cross-over effectiveness trial comparing Apple AirPods Pro 3 OTC-HAF with audiologist-fitted prescription hearing aids. The primary outcome is Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) global benefit with secondary self-reported and behavioral measures. Results: In Study 1, 86.5% of HTF thresholds were within 10 dB HL of PTA, demonstrating clinically 1 IHCON 2026 acceptable accuracy. Test–retest reliability was high, with 84.1% of thresholds within 5 dB HL, and testing time was significantly shorter than PTA. In Study 2, usability of the OTC-HAF was high (mean mHealth App Usability Questionnaire score 6.7/7; mean Hearing Aid Skills and Knowledge Inventory score 93.4%). Participants reported high satisfaction and ease of use, although real-ear measurements showed gain levels generally below prescriptive targets and speech-in-noise benefit was nonsignificant. The ongoing RCT will determine whether outcomes with Apple’s OTC-HAF are noninferior to audiologist-fitted prescription hearing aids. Conclusions: Our findings suggest Apple’s integrated hearing features enable accurate, reliable, and efficient hearing self-assessment and user-friendly self-fitting amplification. The ongoing RCT will provide the first independent comparison between Apple’s consumer hearing technology and audiologist-fitted prescription hearing aids, informing the evolving role of consumer devices in hearing healthcare.