HOKA Skyward X 2  Running Shoe Review

Reviewed May 29, 2026 at 01:20pm
Test bench update Jul 03, 2026 at 03:31pm
Tested using Methodology v0.13 
HOKA Skyward X 2

Track

7.4
Half/Full Marathon Racing 
6.2
5K/10K Racing 
7.8
Long Run 
6.3
Daily Training 
7.4
Energy Return 
7.9
Responsiveness 
9.1
Cushioning 
9.1
True To Size 

Track

 0
  1. Recommended in:
  2. Cushioned

The HOKA Skyward X 2 is an ultra-high-stack, max-cushioned running shoe that provides outstanding comfort and protection. It’s a smooth, mile-eating cruiser that thrives on long runs at relaxed paces and performs particularly well for heavier runners, with just enough versatility for most daily training as well. Though a bit shorter and lighter than the previous HOKA Skyward X, it’s a similar story: the supercritical EVA base still sits below a PEBA top layer, with a convex carbon plate sandwiched between them to help stabilize the stack and keep the ride rolling smoothly. Overall, it feels more like a refinement than an outright reinvention. There’s plenty of life in the ride, but this is a shoe that works with you rather than for you, so you need to put enough force through the platform to get the best from it. For runners looking for a supremely comfortable Zone 2 hero, there’s lots to love.

Our Verdict

7.4
Half/Full Marathon Racing 

The HOKA Skyward X 2 is a good option for marathon racing, thanks to its excellent long-run cushioning and very good responsiveness. That said, this is still a lot of shoe, and its heavier build may start to feel cumbersome as the miles pile up. Runners looking to pulverize PBs will be better served by something lighter.

Pros
  • Outstanding cushioning.

  • PEBA-EVA foam provides very good energy return.

Cons
  • Quite a heavy shoe.

  • To heavy to race efficiently.

6.2
5K/10K Racing 

The HOKA Skyward X 2 wasn't built for speed. Though lively for a cruiser, its weight makes it too cumbersome to feel truly agile, and the soft forefoot cushioning blunts the snap needed to compete across shorter distances.

Pros
  • Plate provides stability and some snap.

Cons
  • Too soft to be snappy. 

  • Too heavy to be speedy. 

7.8
Long Run 
6.3
Daily Training 
7.4
Energy Return 
7.9
Responsiveness 

The HOKA Skyward X 2 delivers very good responsiveness. The forefoot returns an impressive amount of energy thanks to the premium PEBA-based top layer. The rocker is designed to roll well on easy miles and keep you moving, and this helps it feel lively underfoot despite its heft. That said, it's hardly featherweight, so the capabilities of the construction are more subdued than the score suggests.

Pros
  • The mix of PEBA-EVA foam makes the ride lively.

  • Intuitive rocker.

  • Impressive forefoot energy return.

Cons
  • Weight means it falls short of more impressive responsiveness. 

9.1
Cushioning 

The HOKA Skyward X 2 is an exceptionally cushioned shoe. The PEBA-EVA midsole keeps the feet comfortable and protected over longer efforts or recovery runs, making it a great choice for soaking up miles as smoothly as possible. It also has better heel cushioning with increased force, making it an excellent choice for heavy runners and heavy heel strikers.

Pros
  • Remarkable forefoot cushioning. 

  • The mix of PEBA-EVA foam makes the ride comfortable. 

Cons
9.1
True To Size 

The HOKA Skyward X 2 fits true to size in length, with roomy height and width across the forefoot. Most runners can confidently choose their usual size, though the narrow arch may feel tight for some.

Pros
  • True-to-size length.

  • Roomy forefoot height and width. 

Cons
  • Tight arch.

6.3
Stability 

The HOKA Skyward X 2 is fairly stable. It's a tall, soft shoe, and though the convex carbon plate and wide base help keep the titanic stack somewhat in check, it's not the most suited to weaving through bodies on the sidewalk.

Pros
  • Wide outsole.

  • Plate helps tame the foam and stack. 

Cons
  • Tall stack.

  • Foam lacks firmness.

  • 7.4
    Half/Full Marathon Racing
  • 6.2
    5K/10K Racing
  • 7.8
    Long Run
  • 6.3
    Daily Training

  • Performance Usages

  • 7.4
    Energy Return
  • 7.9
    Responsiveness
  • 9.1
    Cushioning
  • 9.1
    True To Size
  • 6.3
    Stability
  • Changelog

    1.  Updated Jul 03, 2026: We've converted this review to Test Bench 0.13, which identifies the different foams used in the shoe's midsole. We've included a microscopic image of the foam cells to give you an idea of what the microstructure looks like. To read more about the changes, see the changelog.
    2.  Updated Jun 22, 2026: 

      We've updated the Popular Comparisons section to include a link to the recently reviewed Mount to Coast C1.

    3.  Updated Jun 17, 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.
    4.  Updated May 29, 2026: Review published.

    Differences Between Sizes And Variants

    We tested the HOKA Skyward X 2 in men's US size 9 as shown on the label for our pair. The pair we purchased is Grout/Cobalt, but you can also get the shoe in other colors, depending on the region. This shoe isn't available in wide widths. The design section applies only to the exact model we tested. 

    Popular Running Shoe Comparisons

    The HOKA Skyward X 2 is more of a max-stack, premium daily cruiser than an outright super trainer. It works well for relaxed long runs or recovery efforts, with enough range for regular daily mileage too. Among similar premium high-stack trainers, the ASICS SUPERBLAST 3 has the most energetic ride and feels the most capable when picking up the pace. The adidas Hyperboost Edge is firmer and lower-stacked, but it feels livelier while still having enough cushioning for long, easy mileage. The Nike Vomero Premium is the colossus of the bunch, with the deepest cushioning, though its weight is the main limiter for faster efforts. If you primarily want a shoe that's comfortable and capable for long runs, the Mount to Coast C1 is a more stable, but less responsive, unplated option.

    Within the HOKA lineup, the HOKA Skyward X 2 sits in the X-series alongside the HOKA Cielo X1 3.0, the HOKA Mach X 3, and the HOKA Rocket X 3. Those are the more streamlined speed or race-oriented plated shoes, while the Skyward X 2 uses its plate to control the tall foam stack rather than chase speed. Think of it as the big sister of the HOKA Bondi 9: taller, livelier, and with more long-run protection. It also towers above the HOKA Clifton 10, with far better bounce and cushioning in a slightly heavier package, though the Clifton 10 is still the pick for regular daily mileage. For runners who want a lighter daily trainer, the HOKA Mach 7 is the better choice.

    For more options, check out our recommendations for the best HOKA running shoes, the best running shoes, as well as the best running shoes for men and the best running shoes for women.

    HOKA Skyward X

    Track

    The HOKA Skyward X 2 and HOKA Skyward X share the same basic identity: huge stack, carbon plate, and a cruiser-first ride. The Skyward X 2 keeps that formula but trims weight, lowers the stack slightly, and adds a new jacquard mesh upper with a non-gusseted tongue for more comfort. The older Skyward X has a little more cushioning on paper, but is also heavier underfoot. The Skyward X 2 is the better pick if you want the same max-stack HOKA concept in a lighter package, while the original still makes sense if you find it on sale.

    HOKA Clifton 10

    Track

    The HOKA Skyward X 2 and HOKA Clifton 10 are both cushioned shoes that can handle daily training, but they're built for very different jobs. The Clifton 10 is the simpler daily trainer: lighter, more stable, and more traditional for regular mileage. The Skyward X 2 is the bigger premium option, using a PEBA top layer, EVA base, and convex carbon plate to deliver far better responsiveness and long-run protection. It's heavier and less stable than the Clifton 10, but much more cushioned under the forefoot. The Clifton 10 makes more sense for runners who want a dependable daily shoe, while the Skyward X 2 is the pick if you want a more energetic long-run cruiser.

    ASICS SUPERBLAST 3

    Track

    The HOKA Skyward X 2 and ASICS SUPERBLAST 3 are both premium high-stack trainers built to make long runs feel easier on the legs. The HOKA uses a PEBA top layer over an EVA base for an intuitive, lively ride, with a convex carbon plate sandwiched between to help control the stack. The ASICS uses a soft FF LEAP top layer over a firmer FF BLAST PLUS base, and is the lighter, plusher of the two, making it more lively overall. Both shoes deliver superb cushioning, but the ASICS is quicker and easier to turn over, and can handle more uptempo efforts, while the HOKA is the plated cruiser for runners who want a bigger feel underfoot.

    adidas Hyperboost Edge

    Track

    The HOKA Skyward X 2 and adidas Hyperboost Edge are both premium high-stack trainers with excellent cushioning, but they feel different underfoot. The HOKA is taller and heavier, with a convex carbon plate that helps control its huge stack rather than making it feel especially fast. The adidas is lower, lighter, and slightly more responsive, with better energy return under both the heel and forefoot. Both are highly cushioned, but the adidas is the better pick if you want the comparatively livelier ride, while the HOKA suits runners who want a taller, plated cruiser. 

    Show more 
    How We Test Running Shoes
    How We Test Running Shoes

    We buy and test running shoes with a very data-oriented approach. While we're just getting started, our methodology already has dozens of tests to help you make the right purchasing decision for your needs. Not only do we use high-end equipment to gather objective data, but we also order multiple sizes of the same shoes so team members can log in miles. This real-world testing is conducted at various paces and conditions, across different types of workouts, to cover all the bases. This allows us to verify our results and ensure they align with what you might feel with a specific pair.

    Test Results

    perceptual testing image
    Sort:
    RATINGS
    Category:
    All
    Design
    5.1
    Weight
    Weight
    283.3 g (9.99 oz)
    Stack Heights
    Heel Stack Height
    48.6 mm
    Forefoot Stack Height
    41.9 mm
    Heel-To-Toe Drop
    6.7 mm
    Advertised Heel-To-Toe Drop
    5.0 mm
    External Shape
    Outsole Heel Width
    94 mm (3.7")
    Outsole Arch Width
    79 mm (3.1")
    Outsole Forefoot Width
    120 mm (4.7")
    Heel Width-To-Stack Ratio
    1.93
    Forefoot Width-To-Stack Ratio
    2.86
    Internal Shape
    Internal Length
    276 mm (10.9")
    Internal Heel Width
    66 mm (2.6")
    Internal Forefoot Width
    91 mm (3.6")
    Wide Sizing Available
    No
    9.4
    Forefoot Fit: Width
    Ball-Of-Foot TTS Deviation
    -1.2 mm (-0.048")
    Toe TTS Deviation
    -1.7 mm (-0.065")
    9.4
    Forefoot Fit: Height
    Toe TTS Deviation
    -1.2 mm (-0.046")
    6.6
    Arch Fit: Width
    Arch Width TTS Deviation
    -5.1 mm (-0.201")
    10
    Length Fit
    7.9
    Heel Rocker Geometry
    Heel Spring
    24 mm (0.9")
    Heel Apex Position
    20.7%
    Heel Rocker Angle
    21.8°
    7.7
    Forefoot Rocker Geometry
    Toe Spring
    54 mm (2.1")
    Toe Apex Position
    62.1%
    Forefoot Rocker Angle
    26.1°
    Foam
    Primary Foam Name
    N/A
    Primary Foam Type
    PEBA
    Secondary Foam Name
    N/A
    Secondary Foam Type
    EVA
    Other Features
    Tongue Gusset Type
    Non-gusseted
    Plate
    Carbon Fiber
    Performance
    7.0
    Heel Compression Energy Return
    Heel Energy Return
    76.2%
    7.6
    Forefoot Compression Energy Return
    Forefoot Energy Return
    78.8%
    8.8
    Heel Cushioning
    Energy Absorbed At 550N
    3.54 J
    Energy Absorbed At 1100N
    11.44 J
    Energy Absorbed At 1900N
    21.20 J
    9.4
    Forefoot Cushioning
    Energy Absorbed At 800N
    6.10 J
    Energy Absorbed At 1300N
    11.08 J
    Energy Absorbed At 2050N
    17.07 J
    6.4
    Heel Firmness
    Firmness At 550N
    42.7 N/mm
    Firmness At 1100N
    48.4 N/mm
    Firmness At 1900N
    64.4 N/mm
    5.0
    Forefoot Firmness
    Firmness At 800N
    47.2 N/mm
    Firmness At 1300N
    59.6 N/mm
    Firmness At 2050N
    80 N/mm
    8.9
    Forefoot Long Run Cushioning
    Energy Absorbed At 10km
    10.35 J
    Energy Absorbed At 20km
    10.08 J
    Energy Absorbed At 30km
    9.91 J
    Energy Absorbed At 40km
    9.77 J
    7.4
    Rocker Stiffness
    Force To Flatten The Rocker
    98 N
    8.4
    Forefoot Bending Energy Return
    Forefoot Bending Energy Return
    75.2%
    8.3
    Forefoot Bending Stiffness
    Forefoot Bending Stiffness
    25.5 N/mm
    Forefoot Bending Force
    297 N