Products
Tested using Methodology v0.12
Updated Jun 22, 2026 03:36 PM
SEE PRICE
Adidas.com
Tested using Methodology v0.12
Updated Jun 18, 2026 06:39 PM
SEE PRICE
ANTA
Weight
220.0 g (7.76 oz)
Heel-To-Toe Drop
6.7 mm
Plate
Plastic Shank
Weight
202.2 g (7.13 oz)
Heel-To-Toe Drop
8.4 mm
Plate
Plastic Shank
Our Verdict
adidas Adizero Evo SL
ANTA Zone 2 90
The adidas Adizero Evo SL and ANTA Zone 2 90 are both lightweight, unplated trainers that blur the line between daily trainer and performance shoe. The ANTA is the more cushioned and protective option, with deeper cushioning and better long-run comfort, while the adidas is firmer and a bit more stable underfoot. Both shoes feel lively, but the ANTA’s softer, bouncier ride makes it the more enjoyable cruiser for easy miles and longer efforts.
Variants
- Adizero Evo SL (Carbon/Lucid Red/Solar Slime - (Men - US 9))
- Adizero Evo SL (Cloud White/Core Black/Cloud White - (Men - US 9))
- Zone 2 90 (Galsang Flower - (Men - US 9))
- Zone 2 90 (White/Red/Silver - (Women - US 7))
Main Differences for
Half/Full Marathon Racing
Half/Full Marathon Racing
Threshold
Half/Full Marathon Racing
7.6
8.0
Heel Stack Height
36.9 mm
38.1 mm
Weight
7.5
8.1
Full Comparison
Design
Weight
7.5
8.1
Right Shoe Weight Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Left Shoe Weight Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Weight
220.0 g (7.76 oz)
202.2 g (7.13 oz)
Stack Heights
Stack Height Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Heel Stack Height
36.9 mm
38.1 mm
Forefoot Stack Height
30.2 mm
29.7 mm
Heel-To-Toe Drop
6.7 mm
8.4 mm
Advertised Heel-To-Toe Drop
6.0 mm
6.0 mm
External Shape
3D Model Full Shoe
Preview 3D
Preview 3D
Outsole Heel Width
84 mm (3.3")
84 mm (3.3")
Outsole Arch Width
64 mm (2.5")
66 mm (2.6")
Outsole Forefoot Width
114 mm (4.5")
115 mm (4.5")
Heel Width-To-Stack Ratio
2.27
2.20
Forefoot Width-To-Stack Ratio
3.77
3.87
Internal Shape
3D Model Internal
Preview 3D
Preview 3D
Internal Length
276 mm (10.8")
270 mm (10.6")
Internal Heel Width
61 mm (2.4")
58 mm (2.3")
Internal Forefoot Width
94 mm (3.7")
92 mm (3.6")
Wide Sizing Available
No
No
Forefoot Fit: Width
7.6
9.3
Forefoot Width Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Ball-Of-Foot TTS Deviation
-2.2 mm (-0.085")
3.6 mm (0.141")
Toe TTS Deviation
-6.4 mm (-0.253")
-0.2 mm (-0.009")
Forefoot Fit: Height
8.5
7.2
Forefoot Height Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Toe TTS Deviation
-2.1 mm (-0.081")
-3.4 mm (-0.132")
Arch Fit: Width
8.5
5.4
Arch Fit Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Arch Width TTS Deviation
-2.6 mm (-0.103")
-6.5 mm (-0.254")
Length Fit
10
10
Toe Clearance Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Heel Rocker Geometry
7.4
7.7
Heel Rocker Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Heel Spring
21 mm (0.8")
24 mm (0.9")
Heel Apex Position
20.3%
15.4%
Heel Rocker Angle
19.3°
28.6°
Forefoot Rocker Geometry
7.2
7.6
Forefoot Rocker Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Toe Spring
49 mm (1.9")
52 mm (2.0")
Toe Apex Position
62.7%
65.0%
Forefoot Rocker Angle
24.0°
27.5°
Other Features
Other Features Photo
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Tongue Gusset Type
Non-gusseted
Non-gusseted
Plate
Plastic Shank
Plastic Shank
Performance
Heel Compression Energy Return
8.1
8.4
Heel Compression Video
Heel Energy Return
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Heel Energy Return
81.4%
83.5%
Forefoot Compression Energy Return
8.4
8.6
Forefoot Compression Video
Forefoot Energy Return
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Forefoot Energy Return
83.3%
85.0%
Heel Cushioning
8.0
8.8
Heel Cushioning Picture
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Heel Cushioning
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Energy Absorbed At 550N
3.46 J
4.20 J
Energy Absorbed At 1100N
10.03 J
10.83 J
Energy Absorbed At 1900N
17.07 J
17.45 J
Forefoot Cushioning
8.1
8.4
Forefoot Cushioning Picture
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Forefoot Cushioning
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Energy Absorbed At 800N
5.16 J
5.38 J
Energy Absorbed At 1300N
8.87 J
9.27 J
Energy Absorbed At 2050N
12.68 J
13.38 J
Heel Firmness
7.7
6.0
Heel Firmness Graph
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Firmness At 550N
44.0 N/mm
35.8 N/mm
Firmness At 1100N
52.8 N/mm
46.2 N/mm
Firmness At 1900N
73.9 N/mm
66.8 N/mm
Forefoot Firmness
7.5
5.8
Forefoot Firmness Graph
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Firmness At 800N
53.9 N/mm
48.3 N/mm
Firmness At 1300N
70.3 N/mm
63.8 N/mm
Firmness At 2050N
98 N/mm
89 N/mm
Forefoot Long Run Cushioning
7.6
8.2
Forefoot Long Run Cushioning
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Energy Absorbed At 10km
8.31 J
8.95 J
Energy Absorbed At 20km
8.17 J
8.82 J
Energy Absorbed At 30km
8.07 J
8.74 J
Energy Absorbed At 40km
7.99 J
8.67 J
Rocker Stiffness
6.1
6.3
Forefoot Rocker Stiffness Video
Forefoot Rocker Stiffness Graph
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Force To Flatten The Rocker
63 N
67 N
Forefoot Bending Energy Return
7.7
8.2
Forefoot Bending Video
Forefoot Bending Energy Return
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Forefoot Bending Energy Return
69.4%
73.3%
Forefoot Bending Stiffness
6.4
6.5
Forefoot Bending Resistance Picture
Compare High-Res
Compare High-Res
Forefoot Bending Resistance
Preview Graph
Preview Graph
Forefoot Bending Stiffness
9.4 N/mm
9.7 N/mm
Forefoot Bending Force
247 N
256 N
To access
Become a member
unlimited full product reviews,
product prices, and
other exclusive site features
adidas Adizero Evo SL
ANTA Zone 2 90
Comments
adidas Adizero Evo SL vs ANTA Zone 2 90: Main Discussion
What do you think of these products? Let us know below.
Looking for a personalized buying advice from the RTINGS.com experts? Members have direct access to buying advice on our member forum.