The Best Running Shoes of 2021

Summer is around the corner, and with it, the new version of this Nike classic: the Nike Air Zoom Pegasus 37. This new model has undergone some significant changes, including a new upper and cushioning. React foam is now under the heel and midfoot, while a thicker and wider Zoom Air unit equips the forefoot. The latter is noticeable under the forefoot and can improve the shoe's bounce, especially when the foot pushes the ground to propel the body. It's important to note that Zoom Air cushioning is softer on the women's version than on the men's model. According to studies carried out by the brand, women prefer softer cushioning than men. Overall, this new configuration with React foam, known for its flexibility, gives a softer cushioning than on the P36 while remaining relatively firm overall. The shoe divides testers between those who find the cushioning perfectly adequate and those who blame it for lack of responsiveness to really have fun. The thickness of the sole remains unchanged, with 28 mm under the heel and 18 mm under the forefoot (10 mm drop). The new translucent engineered mesh is breathable and offers precise socklike foot lockdown: neither too loose nor too tight. Also, its sleek design without the Flywire cables (replaced by a band) is quite stylish. Runners agree that the upper is near perfect and marks a clear improvement over the previous model. The outsole provides good traction in urban areas and has a thick rubber layer to last a long time. Finally, it's interesting to note that the shoe is, unfortunately, slightly heavier than before, with 20 grams more. All in all, the Nike Air Zoom Pegasus 37 stays the course despite significant changes and continues to establish itself as a comfortable and versatile shoe suitable for virtually every runner. Only its cushioning has disappointed some runners, but it's a matter of preference, and we invite you to try it for yourself.

The Hoka Arahi 5 is a support running shoe geared for daily workouts. This latest model comes with a significantly improved fit that hugs feet and delivers optimal support. According to runners, the difference between the 4 and the 5 is huge—and there are several reasons why.

First, let's start with the shoe's midsole, which lends itself to a stable yet supremely comfortable ride. While the Arahi 4 and 5 feature comparable midsoles, runners noted that the 5 offers more padding with the same drop and stack height. The ride is still on the firm side and the bounce minimal, though the Meta-Rocker Geometry allows smooth transitions.

The new and improved upper design—arguably the shoe's selling point—is fast-drying, supportive, and secure. Compared with the Arahi 4, which runners complained was a bit too voluminous, the 5 feels like a more streamlined experience. What's more, the targeted fit doesn't make the shoe more narrow—it's still suitable for runners with wider feet. Finally, the shoe's outsole is built for durability and performs in wet weather and steep slopes alike. While the A5 is a road running shoe, it's suitable for easy dirt tracks.

Overall, the Arahi 5 may be a great daily trainer for runners who value distance over speed. Because it's a stability shoe, it's not designed for races or speed work. However, the potential for a faster pace still exists!

Ultimately, Hoka hit it right with this new version. The 5 is a practical, reliable, and attractive road shoe with long-term potential—built to accommodate distance and stability.

The Clifton is undoubtedly one of the most popular shoes in Hoka's range. After some wandering that was not to the liking of every fan, the Clifton has made a nice comeback in recent years. This eighth version follows the same approach with some changes. Let's go through it together.

First of all, the Clifton is famous for its soft and flexible cushioning within the Hoka series. In this respect, the Clifton 8 is even softer than its predecessor! It's particularly noticeable under the forefoot. According to the American brand (formerly French), the foam is new, lighter, and more springy. However, in practice, the weight remains similar (250 g/8.8 oz for the men's model), and the energy return is satisfactory without being breathtaking. According to some testers, the Clifton delivers a smooth ride. Still, it suffers from the comparison with the last generation of foams (ZoomX by Nike or PWRRUN PB by Saucony, for example) which decided to abandon EVA for Pebax. Last but not least, the famous Meta-Rocker of the brand enables quick transitions from heel to toe by compensating for the low drop (5 mm).

Next, the upper is the part where we find the most significant changes. First, let's appreciate that the mesh is now 100% vegan! The story doesn't say if the sole is also vegan (so we assume it's not), but it's already a good start and shows that the industry is heading in the right direction. The mesh is thinner, which gives better breathability. Also, the new padded gusseted tongue locks in the foot securely and comfortably. The only tricky part is the size of the upper: wide-footed athletes will be happy to know that the upper is higher and wider. However, people with thinner feet may have fit concerns (no pun intended). So be careful if you're in that situation!

Finally, the outsole packs a good amount of rubber in sensitive areas to protect them from abrasion. Traction is adequate, but runners note that the Clifton may not be as stable as the Mach 4, which offers a wider heel (Swallow Tail). Testers report that the stability is better than with the early versions, but there's still room for improvement.

All in all, the Hoka Clifton 8 is a very good running shoe with a soft, high-stack, and flexible platform that packs sufficient bounce to have fun during your daily runs. Plus, the added softness of the midsole makes it more versatile so that you can use the Clifton for any speed or distance. A solid reference that lives up to its reputation!

The third model of the very successful Endorphin collection is a tempo running shoe: the Speed. Complementing the Endorphin Shift (trainer) and Endorphin Pro (versatile with carbon plate), this shoe stands out for its snappy ride at fast paces. Its neon hues and fun design also make it a very appealing shoe. The Speed's midsole is one of the most notable features of this model. Made with PEBA-based PWRRUN PB cushioning, Saucony claims that this material offers an explosive energy return. This high-stack shoe (33 mm under the heel, 25 mm under the forefoot) also features a full-length, S-curved nylon plate, and SpeedRoll geometry to provide a smooth and comfortable transition from heel to toes. Testers unanimously enjoyed the ride, but with one caveat: you have to run fast as the shoe is a bit too harsh at slow paces. The Speed is noticeably much lighter than the Endorphin Shift, giving it a more weightless feel. Runners remarked that the upper of the Speed is particularly excellent, with FORMFIT technology that enhances comfort and breathability. Meanwhile, the outsole contributes to the propulsion of the shoe, engineered with durable rubber that grips terrain and stabilizes the foot. Those who tried the Speed commented on a few drawbacks of the design. The rear and plate of the shoe, though cushioned, proved a bit too firm for some runners. However, this rigidity lessened overtime. Runners also questioned the price point of the Speed, which is $40 less than its Pro counterpart but doesn't offer the same versatility and comfort. The Speed is a great tempo shoe, meaning that it works well for interval or tempo runs, but it is not a daily trainer. Runners searching for running shoes suitable for all workouts will prefer the Pro over the Shift. Overall, the Saucony Endorphin Pro is a very good running shoe with comfortable and responsive cushioning for fast running, even though its firmness may not be to the liking of everyone.

There's no shame in overpronating. Many runners do. And while science has never been able to prove that support shoes can reduce the risk of injury, there are still around, and many like them. Unfortunately, most of them are overbuilt and bulky and a little difficult to ignore on the feet due to their heavyweight. Luckily, technological progress has been able to reduce the weight of support features tremendously. With its 281 g/9.9 oz, the Asics GT 2000 9 is a great example of this evolution.

Little sister of the Asics Gel Kayano 27, the GT 2000 9 offers a lighter configuration to avoid overpronation. The sole is 29 mm thick under the heel with an offset of 10 mm. The cushioning comfortably absorbs shocks, especially with the combination of foam (FlyteFoam) and GEL pads. The technical nature of Asics running shoes is not to everyone's liking with their convoluted configuration. Still, the result is there: testers praise the cushioning for daily training with stability support that does the job, but without being too intrusive. This makes the shoe suitable for (moderate) overpronators and neutral runners alike. Of course, the rebound is mild, to say the least, but this is not the purpose of this shoe, which offers good flexibility otherwise.

The lockdown is also very effective thanks to a well-fitting upper, especially in the midfoot section. The jacquard mesh is dense and thick but offers good ventilation of the foot overall. The only real critique of this shoe, pointed out by several runners, is the thick tongue, which is definitely too long and bulky to be pleasant or practical.

Finally, the carbon rubber (AHAR) that generously covers the outsole is very sturdy and shows no signs of wear and tear even after many runs, according to testers. It's a quality to be appreciated in the age of "rubberized foams," which are softer but much less durable.

All in all, the Asics GT 2000 9 continues to impress as a very good and reliable lightweight support shoe for overpronation. An interesting alternative for those who find the Kayano too restrictive and overbuilt.

Whether you're embarking on a recovery run, long-distance jog, or tempo training, the FuelCell Rebel 2 can get it done. Versatile enough to be used for easy days and sprints alike, New Balance hit it right with their latest Rebel model. This non-plated successor to the original Rebel is soft, responsive, and lightweight, making it a great all-purpose running shoe.

The midsole of the Rebel 2 uses FuelCell technology, which runners stated was successful for this model. FuelCell can feel different depending on the shoe, but those who tried the 2 unanimously enjoyed a cushioned and lively ride. The real bonus is that the midsole's softness doesn't feel mushy or overly plush. The shoe's upper is significantly re-engineered and sports a split opening with a separate tongue, which runners found comfortable and flexible. However, the shoe's outsole lost some points due to durability and wear issues, despite providing decent traction.

Ultimately, those who tested the Rebel 2 didn't have many bad things to say about their experience. Some said the shoe was near-perfect; others noted a few small issues, such as insufficient stability, tongue fit, and foot security. The soft midsole is also not recommended for those used to a firmer feel—such runners may find better options elsewhere. Lastly, as mentioned above, the outsole has real durability issues as many testers noted signs of premature wear.

In summation, the New Balance FuelCell 2 is capable of performing for all types of runners. Whether used for slower paces or uptempo runs, the FuelCell 2 is already a fan favorite. We highly recommend it for anyone seeking an all-purpose, soft, forgiving, and snappy shoe to fit all types of runs.

New Balance shoes have been around for what feels like forever. Solid and dependable, the brand has a reputation for shoes that guarantee stable and steady performance. The brand’s latest daily trainer is no exception, offering a highly padded shoe designed for longer hauls and daily runs. Enter the New Balance 880 v11–available in a lovely robin’s egg blue color–that’s consistent across 5ks and (half-)marathons alike.

Shock-absorbing and responsive, we’d expect nothing less from the midsole of such a classic brand’s running shoe. It’s not overly cushioned despite the high stack (32 mm under the heel), but it’s padded and moderately soft. It’s the versatility of the 880’s midsole that makes it a good option for everything from tempo work to daily runs. Meanwhile, the upper is more refined and breathable than previous New Balance models, engineered with Jacquard mesh. It also keeps feet effectively locked in throughout any ride. The outsole is purportedly much like the v10, with an above-average grip that’s durable and not overly stiff.

Runners really didn’t have much that was negative to say about the 880 v11. A few noted that it was too heavy for their taste; others remarked that it wasn’t plush enough for them. The shoe shed some weight since the last version to reach 272 g/9.6 oz., which is quite reasonable with its high stack. All in all, it's a very standard, dependable shoe that performs exactly how you’d think it would. It’s the same caliber as previous New Balance models and is great for runners seeking longevity without breaking the bank.

The 880 v11 is now available at a standard price point, and most runners will find that it gets the job done for their daily training sessions. It’s not the most unique, stylish, or fantastic trainer, but it’s probably one of the safest, most reliable options out there.

The New Balance Fresh Foam 1080 v11 is a running shoe for daily training with generous cushioning. Considering the success of the v10, the American brand could have just decided not to take any risks and make only a few changes to this new version. For the most part, it did, except for one important detail that divides runners.

Let's start with what hasn't changed: the sole and its Fresh Foam X foam. The stack height is 30 mm under the heel and 22 mm under the forefoot (8 mm drop). The cushioning is still firm, although some testers note that the forefoot is slightly softer. Striking the right balance between firmness and softness is always a subtle balancing act, and NB continues on the middle path to reconcile the two as much as possible. If you liked the previous model's cushioning, you will undoubtedly like the one of the v11! Also, some runners note that this configuration has the advantage of being slightly more responsive. This makes the 1080 v11 particularly suitable for daily training and long distances as well as faster tempo sessions. The only downside is that some runners didn't find the shoe pleasant at slow paces because of the heel's harshness. A versatile model overall then, except perhaps for recovery runs.

The rubber-covered outsole (soft under the forefoot, firmer under the heel) is sturdy and provides good grip. Nothing else to say on this front, and that's a good thing.

Things get complicated with the upper. The front part is flawless—the toe bumper even goes lower over the toes, which takes some pressure off and gives more space. Besides, the Hypoknit mesh is breathable despite its thickness, which makes the shoe comfortable even on warmer days. Unfortunately, the back part of the upper is not as convincing. It seems that New Balance slightly changed the design of its Ultra Heel and several testers experienced discomfort or even pain in the Achilles tendon as a result. It's far from ideal, and it's difficult to know in advance if you will have the same issues without trying the shoes. For this reason, it may be wise to stick to the v10 for now (it's cheaper anyway!). Finally, one of the previous versions' issues is still there: the midfoot fit is still a little tight, which may be uncomfortable if you have wide feet.

In summary, the New Balance Fresh Foam 1080 v11 is a very good, versatile, and sturdy running shoe, ideal for daily training. However, a seemingly minor change at the heel counter ruined comfort for some testers. Hopefully, NB will address this point in the next iteration and confirm the 1080's edge in the cushioned trainer category.

The Hoka Challenger ATR is the comfy trail running shoe for your long Sunday runs on easy trails where you take the time to smell the flowers. This sixth version uses the same formula with a new improved upper.

The new engineered mesh is not only good looking and nicely fitting, it also uses recycled plastic, which is a step in the right direction sustainability wise. Some people found the ATR 5's mesh a little too loose around the midfoot, and Hoka fixed it with the 6. The lockdown is rather tight but pleasant and breathable. However, some runners with wide feet described the toe box as a bit narrow, so be careful if you have experienced such issues in the past.

Then, the CMEVA midsole with a stack height of 29 mm under the heel and 5 mm drop gives a soft cushioning that has the advantage of comfortably absorbing shocks but reduces the ground feel. It also seems that the front part is not very flexible, according to some trail runners. Fortunately, the Meta-Rocker brings a slight bounce to the platform for a smooth ride overall.

According to the testers, the grip is, as on the previous models, satisfactory but a little light for technical terrains such as mud or rocks. Thus, stability is not always optimal, especially since the platform is not so wide. The Hoka Torrent 2 or the Speedgoat 4 seem to be the best choices if you have tough trails in mind or an ultramarathon with many different layouts. Finally, in terms of durability, the outsole showed signs of wear after just a few runs on rocky terrains for some users. It's not necessarily a massive problem since the Challenger is not primarily intended for this type of terrain, but it's not reassuring either.

To summarize, the Challenger ATR 6 is a very good choice for long easy runs. Its versatile and comfortable configuration makes it suitable for moderate trails and even allows you to venture out on the road. We recommend it to rest your feet from more technically advanced footwear.

The Hoka One One Carbon X was the first shoe of the brand to feature a carbon plate. One year later, Hoka persists and signs with this resolutely firm model despite some signs of softening.

First of all, we must put the Carbon X 2 in the context of 2020. After the rush for carbon footwear in 2018/2019, the novelty stage has passed. We are now spoilt for choice, with every major brand offering at least one carbon-fiber plate model. In this regard, the weight of the Carbon X 2 is in the high range with 239 g/8.4 oz (men's model). In comparison, the Adidas Adios Pro weighs 224 g/7.9 oz and the Nike Alphafly 229 g/8.0 oz despite their high stack height close to 40 mm.

The Hoka Carbon X 2 offers a thinner sole than before with 32 mm for men and 30 mm for women under the heel with a 5 mm drop. The cushioning of the PROFLY X midsole and its CMEVA foam is softer but remains firm overall. The carbon plate, which was very stiff on the first model, is also a bit more flexible, which gives a smooth but less propulsive ride than before, according to the testers. Also, the softer cushioning reduces the ground feel. Overall, this slight configuration change provides greater comfort and versatility for longer runs.

Next, the upper remains very similar to the first model, but with a new sleek flared heel. It was well-received overall, especially because of its padding that locks-in the heel comfortably in the shoe. Besides, the mesh is a little thicker, which makes it more resistant than before. The result is a tighter lockdown. The testers praised this improvement, noting that it makes the shoe more suitable for racing. Finally, the wide, foam-rich "Swallow Tail" heel adds stability. It's specially designed for runners who heel strike (the majority) and provides more comfortable cushioning upon landing. However, if you forefoot or midfoot strike, the benefit may be minimal, and the bulky piece may even weigh you down for nothing.

When it comes to durability, the rubberized foam of the outsole is frankly not ideal for high-mileage runners. For example, some users have noticed wear signs after about 250 km/155 mi, which is not great considering the shoe's price. Unfortunately, it's often the case with this type of shoe.

In summary, the Hoka Carbon X 2 remains true to the first model with a firm and springy cushioning that lends itself well to long distances. However, the shoe seduces without impressing, and its durability limits its versatility. In other words, it lacks this WOW factor to instantly turn heads. Hoka fans, go for it! For others, take the time to compare with other carbon-fiber plate shoes to determine what suits you best.

Renowned for its stylish sneakers, Puma is a bit of an underdog brand when it comes to running shoes. Big names like Nike and Asics usually dominate the field, with Puma regarded as a second-tier option. However, the Puma Deviate NITRO shoe is gaining traction and is the brand's continued attempt at a comeback. If Olympian marathon runner Molly Seidel is a Puma fan, after all, they must make a pretty solid shoe!

First things first: let's talk about the NITRO midsole. Nitrogen-infused with a noticeable bounce, the midsole foam is soft and responsive. The overall sensation is springy, with a natural "pop" that occurs through toe-off. The NITRO foam is layered around a carbon plate to increase responsiveness. There's also a TPU plate at the rear to compensate for the softness of the foam. Among the runners who tried the shoe, the midsole was definitely a hit. Many of them noted the versatility of the shoe that's suitable for daily runs and racing alike. Also, while many carbon-plated shoes are overly stiff, the NITRO is quite soft.

The upper of the shoe generated positive feedback, with the general agreement that its mesh fabric is highly breathable. The design also accommodates wider feet, which will be a plus for some runners. For the NITRO model's outsole, Puma uses a rubber compound they call PUMAGRIP, which runners agree gets the job done. Even when running in wet or slippery conditions, PUMAGRIP offers enough traction for a successful ride.

While the Deviate NITRO may be a suitable option for long-distance runners, some users noted some technical problems with the shoe. One of the biggest issues reported was frequent heel slipping, which irritated even through thicker socks. Additionally, the NITRO doesn't always feel the most stable—likely due to the shoe's high stack (32 mm heel height) combined with the soft NITRO foam. Even with the laces tightened, a few runners reported an overall jolty ride due to a lack of stability.

Ultimately, the Deviate NITRO is no gold medalist but may perform perfectly well for you based on your running goals. It's especially suitable for runners looking for a carbon-plate model for their daily workouts. Also, its fairly standard price point makes it a good bang for your buck.

The Brooks Caldera 5 is a trail cruiser built for comfy long-distance running. A near-identical shoe to its predecessor, this trainer provides a smooth ride and easy turnover for uphill runs. Secure, grippy, and surprisingly versatile, the Caldera 5 is one model that should be on any trail runner's radar.

First things first: runners had quite a few thoughts about the C5's midsole. As with other Brooks models, this latest is engineered with BioMoGo technology, prioritizing shock absorption over pop. However, users noted that this particular midsole wasn't as harsh as previous models. The mono-loop engineered upper has significantly improved from previous Caldera models, with a more dialed and precise toe box fit. Its laces enable above-average foot security, and the toe box remains wide enough to accommodate most types of feet. However, some runners noted that the forefoot fit was a bit more tricky than in the past. Lastly, the TrailTack outsole tackles a range of surfaces, despite its lugs' low and narrow profile. It's thriving on flat and technical terrain alike. However, a few trail runners note that the Caldera 5 may not be the best option for highly technical landscapes, especially soft ground like mud.

As with most shoes, the Caldera 5 isn't perfect. One area it falls short is stability: the high stack height combined with a somewhat narrow profile makes the heel feel a bit unstable at times, according to some runners. The Brooks Caldera 5 also loses points on its BioMoGo midsole, which doesn't contribute to a fast or responsive ride. The weight doesn't help either: with a weight of 10.6 oz (301 g), it's undoubtedly no feather. Also, the shoe as a whole seems to require a more extended break-in period than previous models.

Ultimately, the Caldera 5 is a reliable Brooks trail option for runners interested in comfortably tackling long distances on moderately technical terrains. Available for a standard price point for a shoe of this caliber, the C5 is good value for money!