Brooks Cascadia 16 vs. Hoka Speedgoat 4

The two titans of trail running face to face! The choice between these two shoes is not an easy one as they both have their strong points and intended use.

Overall, the upper’s lockdown and volume of the Brooks Cascadia make it more comfortable, especially if you have wide feet. However, this comfort comes at a price: the lockdown is slightly less effective than with the Hoka Speedgoat and its stricter upper.

If you’re going to be speeding downhill on treacherous trails, the Hoka seems more secure.

In terms of cushioning and underfoot feel, both shoes feature a generous stack (29 mm heel height for the Cascadia, 32 mm for the Speedgoat). However, the Cascadia comes with rock plate, which significantly improves comfort, especially during long runs.

Finally, in terms of grip, while the Cascadia provides effective traction on the vast majority of terrains, testers note that the Speedgoat is still superior in this regard.

Cascadia vs. Speedgoat: which one should you choose?

Think of these shoes as complementary models: the Brooks Cascadia for comfort on moderately technical terrain and the Hoka Speedgoat for tougher routes with lots of challenging descents.

If in doubt, you can start with the Cascadia and add to your rotation later if you feel the need.

Also, if you have wide feet, the Speedgoat may not be compatible (to be tested).

Back to the comparison tool

  • Overview
  • Description
  • Brand
  • Availability
  • User Rating
  • Review
  • Facts
  • Terrain
  • Heel to toe drop
  • Heel stack height
  • Forefoot stack height
  • Pronation
  • Features
  • Weight (men)
  • Weight (women)
  • Fit
  • Release year
  • Athletes
  • Technologies
  • Midsole
  • Outsole
  • Upper
  • Cushioning
  • Bounce (1-5)
  • Softness (1-5)
  • Use
  • Distance
  • Speed
  • Workout
Back to the comparison tool
Runner's Lab
Compare items
  • Total (0)