At a Glance
- The New World of Stability
- What to Look For in a Stability Shoe
- Beyond the Shoe
- What Shoes We Included
- How We Tested
- Best All-Around: Asics Kayano 31 ($165)
- Runner-up Best All-Around: Brooks Glycerin GTS 22 ($164)
- Best Plush Stability: Puma ForeverRUN Nitro 2 ($150)
- Runner-up Best Plush: Diadora Nucleo 2 ($160)
- Best Firm, Responsive Support: Brooks Adrenaline GTS 24 ($140)
- Runner-up Best Firm Support: Topo UltraFly 5 ($140)
- Most Invisible Support: Altra Experience Form ($145)
- Best Full-Foot Support: New Balance Fresh Foam X 860 v14 ($140)
- Best for Racing: Brooks Hyperion GTS 2 ($140)
- Best for Up-Tempo Days: Saucony Tempus 2 ($160)
- Best for Going Long: Mount to Coast P1 ($160)
- Best for Recovery Days: Hoka Gaviota 5 ($175)
The New World of Stability Shoes
Defining what makes a running shoe a stability shoe is getting increasingly difficult. That’s a good thing. Not long ago, you could easily identify a stability shoe by its firmer, darker-colored foam underneath the arch side of the foot called a medial post and designed to keep the foot from over pronation, the excessive inward rotation of the rearfoot. On the run, you could tell it was a stability shoe by its stiff, heavy, and controlling ride. Not anymore.
Today’s stability shoes are well-cushioned, smooth riding, and free from clunky controlling devices—so much so that they are, for the most part, equally comfortable for neutral runners as for those needing extra support. In place of the stiff medial post, designers are using a variety of less intrusive, more integrated strategies to help runners whose feet stray inward or outward.
It’s about time, given that the science showing that excessive pronation is rarely problematic and that traditional motion-control methods do little to control excessive motion has been around since the 1990s. But change has come slowly to an industry and a population steeped in the pronation paradigm. While the market for stability shoes—and the number of stable shoe models—has decreased substantially in the past decade, only recently have we started to see major shifts in how a stability shoe looks and rides.
“Stability is a function of so many features, such as sole geometry, stack height, midsole hardness, outsole, upper materials and how they are structured—not just medial posting,” says Kurt Stockbridge, product development vice president at Skechers. “Each of these levers can be pushed and pulled to make a great stability shoe without it having to look like what we typically picture.”
New stability shoe designs embrace the reality that every aspect of the shoe affects the ride, and the new strategies recognize and work to reduce the instability caused by the shoe itself as it distances the foot from the ground. Even many neutral shoes, not designed for or marketed as stability models, are being built with more stable platforms to compensate for the wobbliness of taller, more cushioned midsoles.
What to Look for in a Stability Shoe
The first, and most important feature to look for in a stability shoe is the width and shape.” When I’m sending patients to the store, I’ll just tell them to look for a straighter lasted shoe,” says Paul Langer, sports podiatrist with Twin Cities Orthopedics and past president of the American Association of Podiatric Sports Medicine. Straight lasted means the arch is filled in so there is a straight line following the edge of the sole from heel to ball, with full support under the arch. “A really straight-lasted shoe, you can’t tell if it’s left or right,” says Langer. “Most shoes there’s a little bit of a curve—the less of a curve the more stable the shoe.”
Langer considers this wide platform more important than the denser medial post, which long defined the stability category. “If I’m talking about stability, I’m probably talking more about the shape of the shoe than the posting issue,” he says.
The same is true for other stability features like guide rails, frames, plates, or heel counters. “I split hairs less about those features,” Langer says, referencing research that shows devices don’t control or correct overpronation. That said, he doesn’t dismiss stability strategies, which, he says, can mitigate some of the instability caused by squishing into soft foams. “Stability shoes don’t correct anything,” Langer emphasizes. “They just might be less unstable than a neutral shoe.”
Related to that squishy foam, Langer also says, “I try to help my patients understand that a cushioned shoe is inherently less stable than your bare foot.” Landing with two to three times your body weight on a thick layer of soft foam is, by nature, going to cause that foam to compress unevenly and exaggerate any imbalances. So, even though many shoes are being made with straighter, more filled-in lasts, the height and density of the foam need to be considered.
Finding the combination of cushioning, shape, and stability features that works for you involves running in multiple models and determining what feels best for your foot and stride. This “comfort filter,” which includes assessing what shoe provides the most natural-feeling alignment, is the best starting point we have, Langer says.
Emily Stefanski, sports podiatrist at Coastline Foot and Ankle in Connecticut and Rhode Island, and a D1 collegiate distance runner turned marathoner, concurs. “I tell patients that it’s what feels best on the foot,” she says. “I have my guidelines, what I think is going to work. But that’s not always the case: there are so many factors.”
Beyond the Shoe: Variety and Strength
Keep in mind that even when you find a shoe that complements your stride it shouldn’t be your only shoe. A handful of studies show that runners have a lower risk of injury when cycling through different pairs of shoes. “More important than finding the perfect shoe is appreciating that your feet need to stay strong and adaptable through having variety in your footwear and allowing your feet to have different stresses and loads,” Langer says. So find a stability shoe that feels right for you as your daily trainer, but also have a minimalist shoe (even if just for walking or yard work), and sometimes run in a low, flexible trainer as well as a cushy, rockered one.
Stefanski also notes, “I always try to push to a lot of strengthening.” Coaches, physical therapists, biomechanists, and podiatrists agree that over-pronation and other stability issues usually stem from strength and mobility issues, and can often be corrected by improving your mechanics throughout the chain from foot to hip. Stafanski says, “I believe that we can improve over time and that most people don’t need to be in stability forever—they can get out of the stability shoe. It’s how willing are people to do the exercises.”
What Shoes We Included
Given the fluid definition of what makes a shoe stable, the selection criteria for a list of “stability shoes” is by nature somewhat arbitrary. We chose to include only models with some sort of structural device or design to influence the foot’s rotation.
We did not include plated shoes in this guide, although some runners find that the curved plates in super shoes and super trainers provide sufficient stability for their strides. Stefanski says, “I have noticed with my hyper-flexible people, putting them into a carbon plated shoe, they’re perfect. They don’t need anything else.” Others, however, find plated shoes exacerbate their instability (and each super shoe performs differently).
So, consider this a collection of shoes designed specifically for those who need, or want, help with keeping their feet from over-rotating, but recognize that it is not an exhaustive or exclusive list. Other models with wide bases of support and midsole geometries that reduce lateral torque and help guide the foot forward from landing to toe-off may be as stable as one of these models for you.
How We Tested Stability Shoes
After running in dozens of new shoe models this year, I sorted out those with stability features and completed multiple runs in each of them at a variety of distances and paces. Most models were also run in by more than 20 wear-testers who help select and inform the reviews in our best running shoe round-ups.
About me: I’ve been a runner since the late ’70s and a running magazine editor and shoe reviewer since 2000. I’m the author of Your Best Stride, and Run Strong, Stay Hungry. Once a 2:46 marathoner regularly doing 50+ mile weeks, injuries and age have reduced my volume by half and slowed my easy training pace. Those injuries have also given me rather complicated stability requirements. My left foot is high-arched and neutral, while my right foot has been weakened by strains and appreciates support. Too much medial support, however, makes my right knee hurt, as it has to pronate inward to off-load stress from a chronic condition. All of the above makes me well suited to test these new, less-prescriptive stability strategies which promise to adapt to the level of support you might need.
Best Stability Shoes 2025
Best All-Around
Asics GEL-Kayano 31
$165 at Amazon (Men’s) $165 at Amazon (Women’s)
Weight: 10.8 oz (men’s), 9.5 oz (women’s)
Stack Height: 40–30 mm (men’s); 39–29 mm (women’s)
Drop: 10 mm
Stability Strategy: Soft, high-rebound medial post. Wide, flared base. Sculpted midsole.
Last year’s 30th anniversary Kayano displayed the most radical transformation in stability strategy in the industry. For three decades the Kayano kept runners’ feet in line using a substantial medial post and a plastic midfoot support bridge. The Kayano 30’s new stability strategy, retained in the Kayano 31, replaced these firm, controlling devices with clever geometry and new, unobtrusive foot-guidance strategies.
The platform is wide from heel to toe, and flares even wider under the forefoot. The lateral side of the heel is sculpted out to let it compress more, smoothing and slowing the transition from heel contact to mid-stance. A corresponding bulge on the medial side reduces compression, plus the midsole wraps up along the side of the heel to cradle and subtly support.
Most unique, however, is a pod of softer, lower-density but highly responsive foam under the arch where previous versions had a firm medial post. Asics says this pod’s softness allows it to compress when loaded, increasing the effective midfoot width, and, because it’s higher rebounding than the main carrier, it encourages you to resupinate to an effective position as you’re coming out of midstance.
The thinking behind this new insert stems from research that shows it’s not the degree of pronation that predisposes a runner to injury but the amount of time spent at peak pronation. So instead of trying to block the foot’s rotation, the shoe simply returns it quickly to a neutral position.
On the run, I didn’t notice the rebound under the arch, but I did seem to sense its effect as my foot rolled onto the forefoot feeling upright, centered, and ready for a stable push-off. Overall, the shoe’s width made the greatest impression, both in terms of luxurious space—without feeling sloppy—and the security of landing on and rolling over the generous platform. Despite the 40mm stack height, I didn’t even feel high off the ground, thanks to the lack of any tippiness, the well-balanced combination of cushion and responsiveness, and the surprisingly flexible forefoot. The ride, though not particularly fast, is smooth with no hint of stiff control, yet both of my asymmetrical feet felt cared for and supported—especially on longer runs when I started to tire.
The 31’s new, engineered mesh upper complemented the smooth ride and secured my foot comfortably with plush, but not excessive, padding. Asics also reduced the lateral heel flare, which created some unwanted rotational torque on landing in the Kayano 30, leaving a beveled curve that eased my foot down to the ground even with a heavy heel strike.
Altogether, the Kayano 31 is a shoe that can be worn by nearly any runner and delivers comfort and support that not only stays out of the way but also seems to reduce fatigue.
Runner-up Best All-Around
Brooks Glycerin GTS 22
$165 at REI (Men’s) $165 at REI (Women’s)
Weight: 10.7 oz (men’s), 9.5 oz (women’s)
Stack Height: 38–28 mm (forefoot)
Drop: 10 mm
Stability Strategy: Guide rails. Tuned midsole foam. Wide, straight shape.
Last year we named the Glycerin GTS 21 “Best All-Around Stability Shoe” in our larger road shoe round-up for its blend of plush comfort and stable support. The 22nd version combines Brook’s familiar GuideRails—raised sidewalls along the top of the midsole on both sides of the rearfoot, firmer on the arch side—with something entirely new: tuned midsole foam.
What’s unique about Brooks’ nitrogen-infused tuned midsole, which we first saw in last fall’s Glycerin Max, is that it is softer on the outside and firmer on the inside—a little bit firmer in the heel, a lot in the forefoot—within the same slab of foam. New technology allows Brooks to tune the properties of different sections of a foam midsole during its manufacture.
Carson Caprara, senior vice president of footwear at Brooks, says that they inject two different chemistries into the midsole mold before the supercritical gas-infusion process. “Then when it hits the high-pressure nitrogen infusion, the two cell structures act differently,” he explains, “The inner cell structures stay pretty small and tight and the outer structures blow up a little bit more and create more softness and forgiveness. It’s done without seams and ridges. And so, therefore, it just feels more consistent throughout.”
Brooks tunes the foam so that the midsole has a higher percentage of large cells in the heel to cushion landings, then the mix transitions to mostly smaller cells in the responsive forefoot. The result is a ride that feels both softer, as the outer foam cushions and compresses on impact, and firmer, as my weight transfers smoothly onto the forefoot and pushes off. I found my feet felt more protected while simultaneously more connected in the new model than in the Glycerin 21, as I powered nimbly off the ground, and miles went by faster than expected.
The combination of guide rails in the rear, the firmer, tuned foam up front, and a slightly more filled-in shape under the arch, delivered mostly non-intrusive stability from touch down to toe-off. I could, however, feel the pressure of the guide rail under my arch more than in previous versions, especially toward the front where the foam under it firmed up. This was comfortingly supportive for my foot that needs bolstering but felt a bit controlling for my neutral foot. That lack of versatility kept us from naming the Glycerin 22 best all-around, but the stronger support makes it a better choice for those who want the guidance.
Best Plush Stability
Puma ForeverRUN Nitro 2
$150 at Running Warehouse (Men’s) $150 at Running Warehouse (Women’s)
Weight: 10.7 oz (men’s); oz (women’s)
Stack Height: 38–28 mm
Drop: 10 mm
Stability Strategy: Firmer-foam frame. Wide, straight shape.
Puma’s nitrogen-infused TPE foam delivers one of the smoothest rides in the business for my stride, deftly decelerating landings and transitioning to a lively toe-off. The ForeverRUN Nitro 2 uses two densities of that foam—a softer core inside a firmer perimeter frame—to add stability to the ride without trying to control the foot. Conor Cashin, senior product line manager at Puma, says, “We looked at the speed that runners were pronating and we really tried to focus on slowing that speed down but still allowing runners to pronate to a certain extent because it’s the body’s natural way of cushioning itself.”
In this updated version, the two foams are co-molded rather than stacked and glued together, making the interaction between them smoother. “We were able to bring the soft nitro foam all the way to the ground and all the way through the foot,” Cashin says. “So it gives you more cushioning, more responsiveness—and then the firm nitro around the foot is where you get that stability control.”
The sole is also significantly wider—particularly in the midfoot under the arch—for enhanced stability, and two millimeters thicker, adding to the plushness underfoot. But the engineered, circular-knit upper is where this shoe truly coddles, hugging the heel with a well-padded collar, wrapping smoothly around the foot with a gentle stretch, and locking down the midfoot with light, printed, reinforcing overlays.
On the run, the ride impressed me first for its smooth cushioning (as expected), without anything trying to rearrange my stride. Yet, thanks to the wide stance and firmer rim, it didn’t feel at all tippy, despite the high stack underfoot. I noticed the frame primarily under my big toe where it felt less squishy when my weight rolled inward, providing a welcome stable base for me to roll forward on and push off from. While the plushness of the shoe makes it well-suited for easy days, the midsole’s bounce and roll are spry enough to handle tempo runs or pick-ups without holding you back.
Runner-up, Plush Stability
Diadora Nucleo 2
$160 at Diadora (Men’s) $160 at Diadora (Women’s)
Weight: 9.7 oz (men’s); 7.4 oz (women’s)
Stack Height: 35–30 mm
Drop: 5 mm
Stability Strategy: Asymmetrical geometry. Wide, straight shape. Sidewalls. Responsive foam.
The first thing I wrote on my test summary after a run in the Nucleo 2 was “smooth rolling ride—cushioned and supportive.” The cushioned roll can be credited to the thickness of the foam under the ball and toes (thanks to a low, 5-millimeter drop) that sinks in and lowers the foot gently into the quick, late-stage rocker. The support stems from the push-back of that foam, catching the squish and providing a lively base underfoot.
Stability is created simply with geometry: the wide midsole foam has cut-out grooves along the outside to allow more compression and is filled in under the arch to limit the squish and provide more support. Raised sidewalls on both sides gently cradle and center the rearfoot.
On the run, all I felt was a fullness of foam under the arch side that wasn’t firm or obtrusive but provided a comforting sense of solidity. The plushly padded upper and gusseted tongue coddled my foot while holding it securely. My only negative note was that the heel flared a bit much on the outside of the heel and created some torque on touchdown when going slow with a strong heel strike.
The Nucleo 2’s stability guidance is subtle enough a neutral runner wouldn’t notice it, making this daily trainer versatile enough for all but those needing strong, rotational support. I found myself reaching for this shoe both on days when I wanted comfort and days when I was ready to cruise.
Best for Firm, Responsive Support
Brooks Adrenaline GTS 24
$140 at REI (Men’s) $140 at REI (Women’s)
Weight: 8.0 oz (women’s); 10.0 oz (men’s)
Stack Height: 35.5–23.5 mm
Drop: 12 mm
Stability Strategy: Guide rails. Wide, straight base. Firmly responsive midsole.
Way back in 2019, Brooks dropped the dense, full-height medial post on the Adrenaline, its signature stability model, and replaced it with what they call GuideRails, now found on the stability version of all their shoes. These support structures are strips of raised foam on top of the midsole, stretching from the heel up to the middle of the arch on both sides—firmer on the medial (arch) side to reduce inward roll, and the same density as the midsole on the outer rim to keep the heel from sliding outward. The rails deliver lighter, more cushioned, and smoother support than a full post. Plus, they are less prescriptive, engaging the foot only when needed, thus working for a wider range of runners.
“[The GuideRail] doesn’t go all the way down to the ground, so it gives the shoe a little bit of play,” says Jon Teipen, principal footwear product line manager at Brooks. “It’s not going to be a firm block on the medial side of the shoe. The more you evert [roll inward], the more the GuideRail will push back on you.”
The updated nitrogen-infused EVA-blend midsole foam on this year’s Adrenaline is lighter and noticeably softer, but still tuned to support more than squish, giving the shoe a surprisingly peppy feel. An engineered mesh upper provides a secure and comfortable fit, hugging the midfoot with a double-layer reinforced arch panel while staying airy and flexible up front. The 12-millimeter drop, moderate stack height, flexible forefoot, and palpable support under the arch—which is more filled-in with a straighter last this year—give the Adrenaline 24 the most traditional stable-shoe feel of this group.
Still, unlike the stiff, clunky Adrenalines of old, I found the ride smooth and nonintrusive, with just a bit of supportive rearfoot cradling. Both the cushioning and support seem to shine most when landing on my heel and rolling through the stride, but the connected ride also responded nicely when I picked up the pace and stayed on my toes. With this versatility and dependable support, I could easily wear the Adrenaline as my daily go-to trainer.
Runner-up Best Firm, Responsive Support
Topo UltraFly 5
$140 at REI (Men’s) $140 at REI (Women’s)
Weight: 9.9 oz (men’s), 8.0 oz (women’s)
Stack Height: 30–25 mm
Drop: 5 mm
Stability Strategy: Medial post. Wide forefoot with big toe flare. Low drop. Straight shape.
Topo’s long-run shoe combines traditional features like a medial post with a minimalist-inspired design. The palpable stability in the UltraFly 5’s ride stems mostly from its wide forefoot (flared under the big toe), low, 5mm drop, and moderate stack of relatively firm, responsive foam. And, yes, a wedge of firmer foam lies under the arch to reduce compression and rotation. But it is only half the midsole height at its thickest under the arch, and tapers off as it reaches forward to the ball of the foot and back to the heel. Combined, the midsole provided a gentle, full-foot feeling of solidity as my foot rotated inward, without blocking any natural movement.
On the run, what stood out most was the generous forefoot width: the upper allows enough splay to wear full CorrectToes comfortably and the base is wide enough underfoot for a confident stance and powerful toe-off without any tippiness. That athletic stance is enhanced by the ride of Topo’s lightweight, responsive ZipFoam that gives way just enough to ease landings while keeping ground contact quick and responsively connected. The midfoot-foot-hugging upper complimented the openness of the forefoot and let me relax in the luxury without fear of sliding.
It’s not the sveltest shoe, but it rides lightly even while protecting and supporting. Every time I wore it I felt my stride quicken and my awareness of my stride sharpen, making me more efficient as the run went on. My toes and feet engaged and my posture got taller. No matter how tired I was when I started (and I loved these on recovery days when feeling beat-up), I was always sad to end my runs in the UltraFly 5.
Most Invisible Support
Altra Experience Form
$145 at REI (Men’s) $145 at REI (Women’s)
Weight: 9.6 oz (men’s), 7.8 oz (women’s)
Stack Height: 32–28 mm (men’s); 30–26 mm (women’s)
Drop: 4 mm
Stability Strategy: Guide rails. Wide forefoot. Low drop. Straight shape.
All Altra shoes achieve stability through a balanced, low-drop platform combined with a wide toe box that lets your foot spread out and supports your stance naturally. This allows the brand to use soft, bouncy foams, rather than stiff platforms and rigid control devices—long before other companies began playing with geometry.
The stability model of their new 4mm drop line, the Experience Form, also has guide rails on both sides of the heel. This elevated rim, higher on the arch side, is the same density as the rest of the midsole, creating a cradling effect that gently resists rotation without any controlling pressure. A straight-shaped base, with the arch filled in more than other Experience models, provides a full-foot supportive platform. The engineered mesh upper is clean and simple, but secure and comfortable, gripping the heel and midfoot and staying out of the way of the toes.
I found the Experience Form’s ride soft but responsive, less squishy and bouncy than many of today’s shoes thanks to a moderate stack height of CMEVA. The shoe feels light and nimble, encouraging quick ground contact and a fast roll off the toe that has both a gentle rocker and a smooth, natural flex. The stability features were completely unobtrusive and invisible on the run, but footplants felt connected and supported whether striding easily or pushing the pace. Whatever the pace planned for the day, I often found myself doing pick-ups before I was done, and enjoying the combination of light, quick responsiveness, connected comfort, and subtle support.
Best Full-Foot Support
New Balance Fresh Foam X 860 v14
$140 at REI (Men’s) $140 at REI (Women’s)
Weight: 10.7 oz (men’s), 8.6 oz (women’s)
Stack Height: 35.5–27.5 mm
Drop: 8 mm
Stability Strategy: Angled plate with dual-density midsole. Wide, straight base.
All of the embedded plates popular in today’s running shoes function mostly to stabilize the squish and rebound of thick stacks of soft and responsive foam. While most plates, such as those found in marathon-racing super shoes, focus on directing and enhancing forward roll and push-off, some serve primarily to moderate lateral roll, like Skechers’ winglet and H plates, or the midfoot wings on the plastic plate in the Saucony Endorphin Speed.
The plate in New Balance’s completely remade 860, which replaces a traditional firm medial post, takes rotational guidance a step further. The semi-flexible EVA film, first seen in the Vongo, is sandwiched between two foam layers (soft over firm), and angled so it is higher on the medial, or arch side, and lower on the lateral side. This results in a bottom wedge with more firm foam under the arch side, and a top wedge that puts more soft foam on the outer, landing side. The plate also has hexagonal cutouts that reduce its rigidity on the lateral side but is solid on the medial side. Both the wedges and the cutouts help create a soft, smooth landing and slow the inward foot rotation without creating a clunky transition or compromising cushioning.
The 860 v14’s plate isn’t just about defining that angled wedge, however, says Paul Zielinski, senior global product manager at New Balance. Research in their lab revealed that midsole foams stretch under force when the foot is pronating far or at high velocity. The plate, Zielinski says, “Allows for the foam to be a little more structured, and not stretch or shear as much. Working in combination with the two different midsole hardness foams, this system is helping stabilize the structure of the platform so the foot feels guided all the way from heel to toe.”
Additional midsole foam under the forefoot due to a lower heel-toe drop, a beveled heel, and an increased rocker profile provide a smooth rolling transition from midfoot to toe-off.
On my foot, the plate and dual-density foam provided the strongest full-foot rotational support of any shoe in this group. While the midsole was soft underfoot, and delivered a light, cushioned and smooth ride, my feet pronated very little. The control didn’t irritate my neutral left foot, but, fairly quickly, I could feel the bones in my right knee-that-must-pronate start to rub as it wasn’t tracking inward at all, and the tendons around my right ankle hurt after runs from fighting against the firmer wedge of the midsole.
With its strong medial support, the 860 v14 is not quite as versatile for neutral runners as some other options in this guide, but it’s a solid choice for those who want to slow pronation velocity in a shoe that delivers a smooth, comfortable transition from landing to toe-off.
Best for Racing
Brooks Hyperion GTS 2
$140 at Amazon (Men’s) $140 at Amazon (Women’s)
Weight: 7.6 oz (men’s), 6.9 oz (women’s)
Stack Height: 31.5–23.5 mm
Drop: 8 mm
Stability Strategy: Rearfoot guide rails. Low-profile midsole with quick-rebounding foam.
The second version of the speedy Hyperion GTS is updated with a slightly thicker stack of a new nitrogen-infused EVA-blend midsole compound, which Brooks says is lighter weight and more responsive than its predecessor. That felt true on the run: the foam seemed to push back even while compressing, and rebounded impressively, making the ride lively and inspiring me to pick up the pace.
Like other GTS models in the Brooks line, the Hyperion GTS 2 features stabilizing guide rails along the sides of the heel and midfoot—a raised extension of the midsole foam on the outside, a firmer foam piece on the arch side—to help reduce heel shift and rotation for runners whose stride strays excessively inward or outward, especially towards the end of their run as a result of fatigue. I didn’t notice them at all on the run, except for a lack of any rearfoot tippiness. More significant was a feeling of stable connectedness from the lower-profile midsole, relatively wide base, and lack of squish, enabling quick strides and stable push-offs.
That ground feel isn’t at all minimal, however. The foam cushions smoothly and delivers a comfortable ride at any pace, making them suitable as a daily trainer for someone who doesn’t prefer a tall, squishy feel underfoot, now nearly ubiquitous in the industry. But most runners will appreciate Hyperion GTS 2 as a light, springy, non-plated, up-tempo trainer and racer that doesn’t beat your feet up and gently supports as necessary in the later miles. Bonus is the new, airy mesh upper.
Best for Up-Tempo Days
Saucony Tempus 2
$160 at Running Warehouse (Men’s) $160 at Running Warehouse (Women’s)
Weight: 8.2 oz (women’s); 9.4 oz (men’s)
Stack Height: 33–25 mm
Drop: 8 mm
Stability Strategy: Over-under frame with strategic placement of complementary foams
The Tempus lies at the sharp end of the stability spectrum, delivering a lively ride that made me feel nimble, bouncy, and fast—yet still providing foot guidance and support. The shoe’s secret lies in its midsole, which features ultralight, high-cushioning, and maximum-rebounding—but usually unstable—Pebax foam at its core, here surrounded by a denser, more supportive EVA frame.
Using a firmer frame to control a softer foam’s squish is not new or unique. Most models with frames, however, surround the bottom of the full shoe with firmer material. While this provides a stable stance, it makes landings harsher and can accelerate the foot’s movement as it impacts the edge of the sole and rotates inward. The Tempus, however, employs a unique over-under frame that sits atop the soft Pebax in the heel, bridges the full midsole height under the arch, then dives under the Pebax in the forefoot and runs along the bottom edges up to the toe.
The magic of this frame is that by putting the Pebax on the bottom at the heel, its softness works to reduce the instability caused by the shoe. On impact, it compresses and deforms, rounding the edge of the sole and creating a smooth, gentle transition as the foot rolls inward and forward. Meanwhile, the firmer frame that surrounds the top of the heel wraps the foot and keeps it centered on the platform. The full-height frame under the arch slows the foot’s rotation and supports as needed. Up front, you feel the Pebax’s cushioning and rebound directly underfoot, while the firmer foam on the bottom adds a bit of rigidity to the rocker for quick-rolling toe-offs.
The updated engineered mesh upper on version 2 holds the midfoot more securely, enhancing the connection between foot and shoe and the shoe’s ability to perform at speed.
On the run, not only did the Tempus provide one of the snappiest, most-fun rides of the group, it also seemed best at managing my varied stability needs. The soft Pebax on the bottom of the heel let both feet stay in a natural, supinated position on landing without torquing me inward like several of the shoes with stiffer flared heels did. As my foot rolled inward, the shoe provided my more-mobile right foot effective, but almost undetectable, support while I transitioned over the arch to the stable toe-off, yet didn’t block the pronation I needed for my knee. Meanwhile, my neutral left foot didn’t feel any control or clunkiness, just the smooth, comfy, responsive Pebax underfoot.
The Tempus is narrower than other stability shoes in the heel and midfoot—relying on the firmer frame rather than more foam for arch support—but spreads out as wide as any in the forefoot. It’s also low enough up front to provide the ground feel necessary for a solid, propulsive push-off, and flexible enough to allow a natural roll at any pace or stride angle. The shoe felt responsive and fast at any pace, but the subtle support was always present, and the farther I ran, the more I appreciated the shoe’s guided roll and side-to-side stability.
The Tempus can be a peppy daily trainer or a solid marathon shoe for someone who wants the bounciness of Pebax with some foot bolstering during the long miles, and it is an excellent long-run training shoe for someone who plans to race in a carbon-plated super shoe.
Best for Going Long
Mount to Coast P1
$160 at Mount to Coast (Men’s) $160 at Mount to Coast (Women’s)
Weight: 9.9 oz (men’s size 9, women’s size 10.5)
Stack Height: 37–27 mm
Drop: 10 mm
Stability Strategy: Guiding geometry and midsole insert. Arch wrap. Centering insole.
Mount to Coast is a new brand specializing in building shoes for ultra-runners. But my experience in the shoes leads me to believe that you can enjoy and benefit from them without running all day.
The P1, Mount to Coast’s stability model, has the same nitrogen-infused, PEBA-based midsole found in their R1 racer, delivering a soft, bouncy, and flexible ride that feels more connected than the 37-millimeter heel might suggest. The responsive foam, tuned firmer than the PEBA found in super shoe racers, provides soft contouring underfoot, then firms up quickly to deliver a tactile ground feel. The resulting smooth ride feels almost minimalist in allowing natural foot motion and ground sensitivity—while still dampening harsh landings.
The shape also feels inspired by minimalist design, echoing the foot with a snug heel and secure wrap of the instep, opening up to a flared forefoot—particularly under the big toe—providing roomy space and a stable platform for a fully-splayed foot. That stability is enhanced by an s-shaped insert of flexible plastic that extends from the outside midfoot to under the big toe, providing added support under the natural path of forefoot rotation. Mount to Coast’s research indicates that reducing excess forefoot rotation is more important than correcting the heel rotation that most stability shoe design focuses on, and that their device not only improves foot alignment but helps activate the arch muscles.
Running in the P1, the shoe delivered a smooth, natural heel-toe transition, and I could feel a subtle extra firmness under the ball, which helped my foot achieve a stable stance and push-off. More noticeable, however, was the dual-zone insole that centered and cradled my heel, and the arch wrap built into the upper and tied into the lacing that made my foot feel like it was expertly wrapped with athletic tape—hugging, supporting, and moving with the changing shape of my foot through the stride.
The flexible P1 stayed out of the way when I picked up the pace, but it didn’t feel like it was reducing the effort like some rockered models do. At all-day paces, however, it helped me quickly fall into a comfortable, efficient rhythm that churned out miles so comfortably and easily that I inevitably extended my runs in the shoe as long as time allowed.
Best for Recovery Days
Hoka Gaviota 5
$175 at REI (Men’s) $175 at REI (Women’s)
Weight: 9.1 oz (women’s); 10.9 oz (men’s)
Stack Height: 34–28 mm (women’s); 36–30 mm (men’s)
Drop: 6 mm
Stability Strategy: Softer-foam H-Frame. Wide, straight shape. Sidewalls.
Despite their high stack heights, Hoka’s shoes have always had inherent stability from their wide platform, low drop, and cockpit-like cradle surrounding the heel as it sits down into the top of the midsole. For years their stability models have also used a “J-frame” to provide more rotational control. This firmer-density foam reinforced the midsole at the full height of the arch side of the shoe and wrapped around to the lateral side on the bottom edge.
The redesigned Gaviota 5 retains the wide geometry and raised sidewalls, but swaps the J-frame for a new H-frame. This layer of less-dense foam lies on top of the midsole and surrounds the perimeter of the shoe with a connective piece across the middle—forming a figure eight shape. As the foot sinks into this layer, it nests deeper in the foot frame created by the sidewalls of the more stable, but still cushioned, bottom layer. Hoka says the H-frame allows them to use softer foams than before to deliver inherent stability while enhancing cushioning, especially close to the foot.
On the run, the frame was all but invisible, its presence only noted by a feeling of centeredness as I sunk into the forgiving footbed. It is enough, however, combined with the ample width and secure hold of the flexible-but-not-stretchy creel jacquard upper, to keep the well-cushioned shoe from feeling at all tippy. While it doesn’t make any pretense of reducing inward rotation, the full-foot stability kept both of my feet and knees feeling safely coddled no matter how long I ran.
The post The Best Stability Shoes for Every Type of Run (2025) appeared first on Outside Online.
