Brooks Ghost 16   Review

Reviewed Nov 17, 2025 at 11:47 am
Latest change: Test bench update Jun 30, 2026 at 12:24 pm
Tested using  Methodology v0.12 
Brooks Ghost 16
5.4
Half/Full Marathon Racing 
6.4
5K/10K Racing 
6.2
Long Run 
7.2
Daily Training 

We've tested these running shoes to expand our database and allow users to compare results to help with their buying decisions. We don't expect to write a full review, but if you have any questions about this product, please let us know!

Our Verdict

5.4
Half/Full Marathon Racing
6.4
5K/10K Racing
6.2
Long Run
7.2
Daily Training
  • 5.4
    Half/Full Marathon Racing
  • 6.4
    5K/10K Racing
  • 6.2
    Long Run
  • 7.2
    Daily Training
  • Changelog

    1.  Updated Jun 30, 2026:  We've converted this review to Test Bench 0.12, which fixes how we measure firmness, a component of the Stability and 5K/10K Racing usages. There may be inconsistencies between the text and the scores for these usages, but the scores should still be considered valid. We've also brought back the Energy Return score and added two new usages: Daily Training and Long Run. To read more about the changes, see the changelog.
    2.  Updated Jun 30, 2026:  We've converted this review to Test Bench 0.11, adding two new rocker measurements to the Design section, and three new responsiveness tests to the Performance section. The Energy Return usage score has been replaced with Responsiveness. Check out the details in our changelog.
    3.  Updated Jun 17, 2026:  We've converted this review to Test Bench 0.10, adding a new set of fit tests to the Design section and an overall fit performance usage. Check out the details in our changelog.
    4.  Updated Apr 13, 2026:  We've converted this review to Test Bench 0.9, which adds a Forefoot Long Run Cushioning test to our performance section. Read more in our changelog.
    How We Test Running Shoes
    How We Test Running Shoes

    We've bought and tested more than 250 running shoes. Every pair purchased with our own money, never supplied or sponsored by brands. Our data-driven tests are designed to go beyond marketing claims, and since every shoe goes through the exact same methodology, you can directly compare results to find the right pair for your needs. 

    Test Results

    perceptual testing image
    5.5

    Energy Return

    5.8
    Forefoot Compression Energy Return
    4.9
    Heel Compression Energy Return
    8.3

    Stability

    External Shape
    9.0
    Heel Firmness
    9.8
    Forefoot Firmness
    Other Features
    5.8

    Cushioning

    6.6
    Heel Cushioning
    5.0
    Forefoot Cushioning
    5.7

    Responsiveness

    5.7
    Forefoot Bending Energy Return
    5.9
    Forefoot Bending Stiffness
    5.8
    Forefoot Rocker Geometry
    5.3
    Rocker Stiffness
    9.6

    True To Size

    10
    Length Fit
    9.2
    Forefoot Fit: Width
    9.9
    Arch Fit: Width
    6.6
    Forefoot Fit: Height
    Additional Tests
    5.5
    Design Weight
    Design Stack Heights
    Design Internal Shape
    5.8
    Design Heel Rocker Geometry
    5.1
    Performance Forefoot Long Run Cushioning

    Popular Running Shoe Comparisons

    HOKA Clifton 9

    The HOKA Clifton 9 and Brooks Ghost 16 are both classic daily trainers, but they take different approaches. The HOKA is the higher-stack, more cushioned option, with better heel and forefoot protection, making it better suited to relaxed daily miles and longer easy runs. The Brooks is the more traditional workhorse: lower stacked, firmer, more stable, and a bit more responsive underfoot, though it doesn’t offer the same level of protection. For runners who want more cushioning and a softer ride, the HOKA is the clearer fit. The Brooks is the better match if you prefer a firmer, more stable daily trainer for easy runs and walking.

    New Balance Fresh Foam X 880v14

    The Brooks Ghost 16 and New Balance Fresh Foam X 880v14 are both daily trainers, but they give you slightly different versions of what that means. The Brooks is the more stable option, with a slightly firmer feel and better energy return under the forefoot, making it a touch more responsive during easy runs and steady daily mileage. The New Balance is a bit more cushioned, with slightly better heel and forefoot protection and a roomier fit, though it doesn’t feel especially energetic either, and both shoes are better kept to easy and steady efforts. The Brooks suits runners who want a steadier, more traditional trainer. For a little more cushioning, comfort, and room in the fit, the New Balance is the pick for relaxed daily miles.