We Break Down the Differences Between Hoka and Brooks Shoes

"Hearst Magazines and Yahoo may earn commission or revenue on some items through these links."

PRETEND FOR a minute that you’re browsing a running store’s shoe selection. You know what you’re almost guaranteed to see lining the shelves? Brooks and Hokas. Both brands are well-known for crafting quality running shoes (endorsed by the APMA) that runners and NARPs alike clamor over. However, that’s pretty much where the similarities stop.

Dr. Brad Schaeffer, a foot and ankle surgeon starring on TLC's 'My Feet Are Killing Me,' personally owns both Brooks and Hoka running shoes, and chooses when to wear each based on feel and support. "I love Hoka for how they feel on my feet during each step and stride. I like Brooks for the support and stability they offer," he says.

Quick disclaimer: Finding a pair of running shoes that you love is a personal experience. Both of these brands make fantastic sneakers, so I’m not here to say one is necessarily better than the other. We all move differently, have various arch shapes (I’m part of the flat feet club), and run different mileage and terrain. I believe in choosing running shoes that feel good and help you reach your individual goals. Now, let’s get into this Hoka vs. Brooks running shoes comparison, shall we?

SHOP HOKA RUNNING SHOES SHOP BROOKS RUNNING SHOES

Hoka vs. Brooks Main Differences

Hoka is best known for its abundance of stacked cushioning, and is traditionally lightweight. Hoka's most popular styles (like the Bondi 8’s) are designed to help runners log significant mileage in comfort. Some of its shoes have a rockered style, which keeps your stride quick because it physically propels you into your next step as you land. "When Hoka came out with the rocker bottom shoe, it took a while for me to catch on," explained Dr. Schaeffer, who knew from podiatry school that this shape can be a game changer for people with issues in the Achilles or ball of the foot. According to Dr. Schaeffer, it works just as well for patients looking to prevent those issues, too.

Hokas are a relatively new type of shoe for the masses and require a break-in period for most people to become accommodated to the shoes, according to Dr. Mark Mendeszoon, a board-certified podiatrist and foot and ankle surgeon at Precision Orthopaedic Specialties in Chardon, Ohio.

On the other hand, Brooks is synonymous with stability running shoes, and feature innovative technology like GuideRails, which, according to the brand’s research, “helps reduce excess deviation from your habitual motion path.” This means it's supposed to keep the wearer’s feet from pronating or supinating too much. Hoka is more well-known for its high foam stack cushioning, which is a trend Brooks is only just starting to embrace.

Clifton 9

Bondi 8

Gaviota 5

Mach 5

Hoka vs. Brooks Running Shoes Durability

In terms of overall durability with the specific Brooks and Hokas I've owned, I've found more consistent longevity with Brooks models. For starters, the Brooks models I've experienced have denser midsole cushioning compared to the lighter materials featured in Hoka's midsole, which seems to compress more quickly. This compression is excellent for comfort and responsiveness (Hoka's main qualities), but I've found it doesn’t tend to bode well for long-term durability. The more the midsole compresses, the more quickly it wears down, and the faster you'll need to replace it.

Most Brooks running shoes sport the same synthetic upper, which is fairly durable. However, this synthetic upper also feels less flexible to me. I've made the mistake of purchasing Brooks a size too small, and learned the hard way that the synthetic upper is not forgiving, so keep that in mind. Hoka uses a range of upper materials for all of its shoes. For example, the Clifton 9 has a knit upper, which is more breathable, but I've found loses its shape and support over time. The Bondi 8 has an upper made of synthetic fiber, which I've experienced better durability from.

The experiences I've mentioned have led me to lean toward Brooks when considering durability, but it's important to acknowledge that those experience don't encompass the whole product line for either brand. All in all, they’re both very durable.

Beast '20

Dyad 11

Adrenaline GTS 22

Glycerin 20

Hoka vs. Brooks Running Shoes Fit and Sizing

Wondering what the size ranges are for both Hoka and Brooks running shoes? We got you. In men’s sizes, you’ll tend to find Hokas in sizes between 7 to 14. However, there are specific Hokas available in both smaller and larger sizes (3.5 to 16), but these sizes are harder to find.

Length wise, Hoka runs true to size. I’d recommend choosing the wide option if your foot is slightly wider than regular, as Hoka shoes tend to run a bit narrow, especially through the inner arch (that's where we've struggled with blisters the most when running in Hokas).

Brooks is traditionally available in men’s sizes 7-15, but you can find select outliers down to size 5 and up to 16.

When choosing a size, Brooks recommends purchasing shoes “1/2 size to one size larger than what you wear in casual or dress shoes.” When I shop for Brooks shoes, I look for half a size up from my usual size 9, and find that they fit just right. I don’t have a wide foot, and feel that the medium width is ideal for those with a narrow to regular foot. If your feet run wide, keep your eyes peeled for EE Brooks, which means it's a little wider than the standard.

Hoka vs. Brooks Running Shoes Cushioning

If you’ve ever seen a pair of Hokas out in the wild, you’ll notice one thing: These puppies are PLUSH. The amount of cushioning may seem over the top, but that’s what Hoka does best. If you choose to pick up a pair of Hoka running shoes, expect to find thick cushioning through the midsole and a sky-high stack. Hoka is dubbed the King of Cushion for a reason, anyway.

Additionally, you’ll notice that most Hokas feature a meta-rocker, which may be called an ‘early-stage meta-rocker’ or a ‘late-stage meta-rocker’. An early-stage meta-rocker refers to the cushioning that is purposefully placed behind the metatarsal bones, which tends to encourage quicker transitions and foot turnover. A late-stage meta-rocker means the cushioning is placed after the metatarsal bones, which leads to the shoe being more stable.

Brooks is nowhere near as cushioned as Hokas, but some folks aren’t looking to feel the bounce that cushioning provides. Instead, Brooks makes shoes that cater to a variety of cushioning preferences. If you prefer something with more of an energy return, look for Brooks with BioMoGo DNA cushioning made of EVA foam. This cushioning is available in models like the Beast 20 and the Dyad 11. For those who crave more responsive and soft cushioning, look for Brooks made with DNA Loft technology. This type of cushioning is available in Brooks Glycerin 20 and Ghost 15.

SHOP HOKA RUNNING SHOES SHOP BROOKS RUNNING SHOES

Hoka vs. Brooks Running Shoes Stability

If you’re someone who overpronates, stability is an important thing to look for in your running shoes. And while both Hoka and Brooks carry stability shoes, Brooks has models featuring GuideRail technology specifically designed to help with overpronation. "Brooks have a complete range of shoes from neutral to motion control," says Dr. Mendeszoon.

Hoka doesn’t have as many shoes geared towards stability, but some models, like the Gaviota 5 and the Arahi 6, are. "I generally don’t place people in Hokas who need more support and stability," explains Dr. Mendeszoon. "Hokas will be better for people who have a higher arch or neutral foot type and seek cushioning."

Instead of GuideRails, Hoka features J-Frame technology, which provides additional medial support to help keep the foot from overpronation. For a shoe that we’d recommend for stability, check out the Brooks Adrenaline GTS 22 or the Beast 20.

Read more: Best Running Shoes for Overpronation

Hoka vs. Brooks Running Shoes Feel

Drawing from our own testing, Hokas are well cushioned and fit true to size, if not a little narrow through the inner arch. Brooks traditionally runs small throughout (about a half size) and are less flexible, but have more space in the toe box for toes to splay comfortably. Brooks is also more stable but less plush than Hoka.

Hoka vs. Brooks Running Shoes Price

Depending on the model you choose, you can expect to spend anywhere from $80-$250 for both Hoka and Brooks. Hoka's most popular model, the Clifton 9, is around $150. And you won’t pay any less for Brooks' most beloved shoe, the Glycerin 20, which retails for around $160.

You may find that previous years’ models will retail for less money, but you won’t get the most up-to-date shoe technology offered by the brands. Additionally, you may notice websites like Zappos offer financing through Afterpay if purchasing a pair of shoes all in one go isn’t doable for you.

SHOP HOKA RUNNING SHOES SHOP BROOKS RUNNING SHOES

Conclusion

Long story short? Both Hoka and Brooks make top-tier running shoes designed for a variety of activities. The price point of each brand is comparable, so consider what type of cushioning and stability you prefer before making your final shopping decision. If you prefer more hefty, stacked cushioning, grab a pair of Hokas. For those who prefer a more grounding stability shoe, Brooks is the answer.

Shop More of Our Favorite Running Shoes

Under Armour Running Shoes | Asics Running Shoes | On Running Shoes | Long Distance Running Shoes | Wide Toe Box Running Shoes | Treadmill Running Shoes | Lightweight Running Shoes | Most Cushioned Running Shoes

You Might Also Like

• The Best Hair Growth Shampoos for Men to Buy Now

• 25 Vegetables That Are Surprising Sources of Protein