Hoka vs. Brooks running shoes: Which brand is best for most runners?

Most runners know the hype surrounding Hoka and Brooks running shoes.

Both brands are known for supportive and responsive footwear designed to improve your run while minimizing injury risk. Everyone, from 5K enthusiasts to everyday joggers, adores them, and honestly, that’s sort of the problem if you’re shopping for new sneakers: which one is better?

As a runner, I’ve often pondered the question, so I reached out to both Hoka and Brooks and asked, “May I test your shoes?”

Because no foot or runner’s strike is the same (more on that later), I also enlisted Commerce Writer Emma Sutton-Williams to test the sneakers with me. She’s done a triathlon, three marathons and several 10Ks. My running resume isn’t as impressive but I do clock a minimum of 3 miles every other day, plus have completed two 5Ks, including Warrior Dash.

Hoka vs. Brooks: Overview

Hoka:

Established in 2009 by Jean-Luc Diard and Nicolas Mermoud, Hoka quickly took off as a popular brand amongst runners, as well as celebrities who liked the oversized and colorful look of the sneakers. Known for its thicker-than-average sole, each shoe is made up of three core technologies: an Active Foot Frame, a Cushioned Midsole, and a MetaRocker. The frame cups the foot to gently keep it in place while the cushion acts as a shock absorber. The infamous Metarocker creates a smoother transition from heel to toe, reducing strain on the ankle and calf.

Brooks:

Although Brooks has been in the shoe making business for more than 100 years, it began producing sneakers in 1974. Since then, it has established a large catalog of athletic shoes, each known for being lightweight and outfitted with the latest technologies to assist with stability, speed, and overall comfort. Podiatrists love Brooks running shoes for their lower stack height, cushion and ankle support, while brand fans praise their flexibility and adaptability.

Hoka and Brooks make great shoes and are both approved by ​The American Podiatric Medical Association (AMPA), making it all the more difficult to decide which one to go with. To make things a touch easier on ourselves, we decided to go with popular picks from the brands and measure how they held up against each other.

Brooks Ghost 16

Brooks is known for its supportive running sneakers and the Ghost 16 is no exception. It’s lighter and more breathable than others in the collection, offering softer cushioning and a flexible sole. For those who run in hot climates for long distances, these are sure to be a crowd pleaser, as they won’t weigh you down. The neutral running shoe has the brand’s GlideRoll Rocker, which works in conjunction with the curved mid and outer sole for easier transitions. An enhanced upper offers enhanced stability, while mid-level cushioning provides comfort to the ankle and heel.

Stack height: 24 mm | Weight: 8.5 ounces | Drop: 12 mm | Colors: 16+ | Sizes: (Women) 5-13, (Mens) 7-15

---

Hoka Clifton 9

The latest in the award-winning Clifton series, the Clifton 9 promises a cushier landing than its predecessor with less weight. Those familiar with the line will recognize that some of the sneaker’s hotmelts and overlays have disappeared without compromising the softness of the shoe. While the general look is the same, the reduction in mass may positively impact your pace.

The sneaker also has an early-stage MetarRocker that starts midfoot to create a smoother transition from heel to toe. For those who deal with knee and ankle pain, this feature will be appreciated for its ability to alleviate pressure from impact. A neutral running shoe, it’s designed for runners seeking balance during daily runs.

Stack height: 29-32mm | Weight: 7 .05-8.7 ounces | Drop: 5.0 mm | Colors: 20+ | Sizes: (Women) 5-12, (Mens) 7-16

---

Our Review

Before Sutton-Williams or I took our new kicks for a test run (wink-wink), I reached out to two experts to expand my knowledge of what makes a good running shoe and the things anyone, from a bonafide athlete to a running novice, should consider when selecting a sneaker.

First, I contacted Ben Delaney, New York Road Runners Director of Training Programs. “Shopping online is how a lot of runners buy today but purchasing the “on trend” or most colorful shoe might not be what you need,” he explained.

“If a runner knows their foot strike and what shoe support they need (neutral, stability) that can help when buying online.”

If you don’t know what a foot strike is, don’t be ashamed. I’ve been running for years and had to ask Delaney for the definition. “A foot strike is defined as the moment in the running gait cycle when the foot first contacts the ground,” he explained.

“Ideally, we want the foot strike to land beneath the hips. Yet, as we know, runners come in all shapes and sizes. It’s important to consider there is no single perfect running technique to suit everybody…Depending on your foot strike this will help inform you on what type of shoe will best suit your running needs.”

Additionally, comfort plays a large role and should take precedence over everything else. Wil Colón, a Clinical Specialist at NYU Running Performance Program, recommended paying attention to the cushioning of a sneaker, especially if unable to try it on in person.

“Having a shoe that you feel comfortable running in is really important,” he explained, mentioning that two runners could have the same foot strike but still require different shoes based on the intensity of their landing.

How to know your foot strike:

You don’t need to visit a runner clinic to learn your foot strike but merely have to pay attention to the way your foot lands when you run. Checking the bottom of your current sneakers for where they have the most wear and tear is also a good indicator.

• Forefoot strike: If your toes or outside of the foot touch the ground first, you have a forefoot strike. Those who have this runner style tend to have a quick and light gait.
• Midfoot: Those with a midfoot strike land with their heel and toe on the ground at the same time. This helps to evenly distribute weight and minimize impact.
• Heel: A heel strike is the most common of the three types and is when the heel of the foot lands first.

I’m a midfoot striker with bony, high-arched feet, so I like lightweight sneakers with ample cushioning.

In contrast, Sutton-Williams is a forefoot striker but also prefers sneakers with a softer feel. “I look for a cushion,” she said. “I’ve run several marathons now, so my knees are a little overused. I want a shoe that gives me a little roll forward, so higher in the back and lower in the front to propel me forward. If I’m working out in the gym, I prefer a flat running shoe that’s more even and provides balance.”

Hoka vs. Brooks: Feel

As someone who has worn (and loved) the Brooks Ghost for years, I didn’t think a more comfortable shoe existed until I tried the Hoka Clifton 9. Slipping them on was like experiencing a hybrid memory foam mattress after years of sleeping on a box spring.

This isn’t to say that the Brooks Ghost 16 isn’t comfortable. It is. But the plushness that the Clifton 9 offers is truly on another level.

For those with more fat on their feet or who prefer a lighter-weight sneaker, the Ghost 16 may be better equipped. However, I found that I wasn’t hindered by the weight because of how easy the MetaRocker made it for me to move forward.

Sutton-Williams also agreed that when it came to feel, Hoka won. “I found that my knees stopped aching when I switched to the Clifton 9,” she said.

Hoka vs. Brooks: Fit and Sizing

Feet naturally expand as you run, so I ordered up a size in both sneakers. While a few customer reviews on Brooks’ website reported that they run small, I found that they had a glove-like fit and Sutton-Williams thought it was a major pro that they were also available in wide, extra wide, and narrow.

There wasn’t excess room in the toe box but for those concerned with stability, this isn’t necessarily a bad thing, and if you enjoy feeling like your foot is molding with the shoe, you’ll enjoy the overall feel.

As for the Clifton 9, I also found them true to size, though they felt very different than the Ghost 16. As previously mentioned, they’re heavier. I also felt there was more room between my foot and the wall of the shoe. Again, not a bad, thing, but if you like something more snug, Brooks will be for you.

Hoka vs. Brooks: Durability

I’ve been running in the Hoka and Brooks sneakers since June and would characterize both as exceptionally durable shoes. On average, I run between 17 to 25 miles per week, so between the two, I’ve already put close to 100 miles on both.

As you can see, the bottoms are still in excellent shape, especially considering that I run mainly on concrete.

Although I’ve worn the Clifton 9 a bit more, I got caught in a terrible downpour while wearing the Ghost 16 and they still held up beautifully. Deterioration to the tread has been minimal.

Hoka vs. Brooks: Cushioning

Sutton-Williams and I both agree that the cushioning for the Hoka Clifton 9 is unparalleled. While most of the cushion in the Ghost 16 is felt around the heel, the cushion in the Clifton’s is felt throughout.

For those who run on track or treadmills, the additional plushness may not feel necessary. However, my feet and joints found it intoxicating.

Interestingly, I preferred the Brooks more on the treadmill, which I typically walked on instead. It felt easier to get a sense of the belt, which made me feel more secure than when I wore the Cliftons.

Hoka vs. Brooks: Stability

In terms of stability, both sneakers are top, though I will say I was more aware of my foot strike when wearing the Brooks. They fit closer to the foot, so there’s no jostling around, making one feel more stable inside the shoe. However, I also felt I had less protection if I tripped or turned my heel the wrong way.

In contrast, while not being as breathable, the Clifton 9 gave me more “breathing room,” if that makes sense. I felt, even when I tied both sneakers tightly, that I received better circulation to my feet in the Cliftons, which resulted in longer runs.

Because they’re more glove-like, the Brooks’ felt less forgiving when my strike became a little sloppy, which can happen on the last lap. In some ways, this is a positive, as they forced me to maintain proper form.

Hoka vs. Brooks: Price and Value

Coming in at a $5 difference, the Ghost 16 and Clifton 9 will roughly cost you the same. Are they both worth it? Yes.

Both brands are loved by runners for a reason. Known for their exceptional quality, either option is money well spent. It all comes down to what you’re looking for and your preference in terms of feel.

The Bottom Line:

---

As mentioned multiple times in this review, the Brooks Ghost 16 and Hoka Clifton 9 are both fantastic running sneakers, and most would be happy to have either as part of their running gear. Sutton-Williams wore the Ghost to cross the finishing line of a marathon and would “recommend [them] for long-distance runs, especially if you’re aiming to break speed records.”

We also agreed that they were better in terms of stability, and could also be enjoyed for cross-training, as they are lower to the ground. However, both of us really loved wearing the Clifton 9.

“It’s an excellent choice for anyone with joint issues, as the slightly elevated heel softens the impact. A friend of mine, who fractured her foot, was advised by her podiatrist to wear Hokas exclusively,” said Sutton-Williams.

Similarly, I found them more pleasurable to wear. Although heavier than the Ghost 16, I was able to run longer because my feet were so comfortable.

For those looking for a sneaker they can run and do other sporty activities in, the Ghost 16 will work well. However, for those seeking a sneaker purely for running, the Clifton 9 is unbelievable.

How we tested:

To test the Clifton 9 and Ghost 16 we looked at a variety of things:

• Surfaces: Because not all runners train in the same environment, Sutton-Williams and I tested both sneakers on various surfaces, including treadmills, running tracks, and sidewalks. This was the best way for us to determine the sneakers’ overall feel and stability when used on different terrains.
• Weight: The weight of a sneaker can greatly impact one’s speed and how they move. When testing the sneakers, we asked ourselves how the shoe’s weight impacted, if at all, our endurance and whether it enhanced or took it away.
• Comfort: This was the largest deciding factor. While we both agreed that stability is important, it also plays into a shoe’s comfort and whether one feels protected during a run. Because of its extra cushioning and design, we felt the Clifton 9 was supportive and pleasant to wear, making training easier.

---

Why Trust Post Wanted by the New York Post

For over 200 years, the New York Post has been America’s go-to source for bold news, engaging stories, in-depth reporting, and now, insightful shopping guidance. We’re not just thorough reporters – we sift through mountains of information, test and compare products, and consult experts on any topics we aren’t already schooled specialists in to deliver useful, realistic product recommendations based on our extensive and hands-on analysis. Here at The Post, we’re known for being brutally honest – we clearly label partnership content, and whether we receive anything from affiliate links, so you always know where we stand. We routinely update content to reflect current research and expert advice, provide context (and wit) and ensure our links work. Please note that deals can expire, and all prices are subject to change.

---

Hunting for a headline-worthy haul? Keep shopping with Post Wanted.