adidas Adizero Adios Pro 4 vs HOKA Cielo X1 2.0

Which Running Shoe Is Better?

Products

adidas Adizero Adios Pro 4
HOKA Cielo X1 2.0

Tested using Methodology v0.9

Updated Nov 24, 2025 06:08 PM

SEE PRICE
Adidas.com

Tested using Methodology v0.9

Updated Nov 14, 2025 09:31 PM

SEE PRICE
Hoka.com
  1. Recommended in 4 articles:
  2. Running Shoes
  3. For Men
  4. For Women
  5. 1

Our Verdict

adidas Adizero Adios Pro 4

HOKA Cielo X1 2.0

The adidas Adizero Adios Pro 4 and the HOKA Cielo X1 2.0 are both elite racing shoes with medial cutouts designed to reduce weight, but they differ in key aspects. The adidas shoe is lighter and more energetic, with pronounced rebound from its Lightstrike Pro midsole, making it feel more responsive at toe-off. It has a clear rocker effect, but it kicks in later compared to the HOKA, which uses an aggressive early-stage rocker and heel bevel that promotes smooth transitions, especially for midfoot and forefoot strikers. The HOKA feels noticeably softer and more protective underfoot, and it's got a carbon plate instead of the carbon rods adidas uses.

0 

Variants

  • Adizero Adios Pro 4 (Cloud White/Core Black/Silver Mettalic - (Women - US 7))
  • Adizero Adios Pro 4 (Grey Two/Lucid Red/Grey - (Women - US 7))
  • Adizero Adios Pro 4 (Silver Metallic/Lucid Red/Grey - (Men - US 9))
  • Cielo X1 2.0 (Frost/Black - (Men - US 9))
  • Cielo X1 2.0 (Frost/Black - (Women - US 7))
  • Cielo X1 2.0 (Frost/Lava - (Men - US 9))
  • Cielo X1 2.0 (Frost/Lava - (Women - US 7))

Main Differences for
Marathon Racing

Threshold 

0.10

Marathon Racing 

8.7
8.4

Forefoot Energy Return 
 

8.9
8.5

Full Comparison

Design

Weight  

8.2
8.0

Right Shoe Weight Photo  

Left Shoe Weight Photo  

Weight 
 

197.5 g (6.97 oz)
204.6 g (7.22 oz)
Show Text 

Stack Heights 
 

Stack Height Photo  

Heel Stack Height 
 

39.5 mm
40.5 mm

Forefoot Stack Height 
 

32.5 mm
31.6 mm

Heel-To-Toe Drop 
 

7.0 mm
8.9 mm

Advertised Heel-To-Toe Drop 
 

6.0 mm
7.0 mm
Show Text 

External Shape 
 

3D Model Full Shoe  

Outsole Heel Width 
 

82 mm (3.2")
74 mm (2.9")

Outsole Arch Width 
 

54 mm (2.1")
48 mm (1.9")

Outsole Forefoot Width 
 

118 mm (4.7")
108 mm (4.2")

Heel Width-To-Stack Ratio 
 

2.08
1.83

Forefoot Width-To-Stack Ratio 
 

3.63
3.42

Internal Shape 
 

3D Model Internal  

Internal Length 
 

275 mm (10.8")
269 mm (10.6")

Internal Heel Width 
 

60 mm (2.4")
63 mm (2.5")

Internal Forefoot Width 
 

93 mm (3.7")
90 mm (3.6")

Wide Sizing Available 
 

No
No
Show Text 

Other Features  

Other Features Photo  

Tongue Gusset Type 
 

Semi-gusseted
Semi-gusseted

Plate 
 

Carbon Fiber Rods
Carbon Fiber
Show Text 
Performance

Heel Energy Return 
 

8.7
8.3

Heel Compression Video  

Heel Energy Return  

See details
See details

Heel Energy Return 
 

85.6%
82.5%
Show Text 

Forefoot Energy Return 
 

8.9
8.5

Forefoot Compression Video  

Forefoot Energy Return  

See details
See details

Forefoot Energy Return 
 

87.0%
83.6%
Show Text 

Heel Cushioning 
 

8.1
8.9

Heel Cushioning Picture  

Heel Cushioning  

See details
See details

Energy Absorbed At 550N 
 

4.43 J
5.04 J

Energy Absorbed At 1100N 
 

9.88 J
11.12 J

Energy Absorbed At 1900N 
 

14.98 J
17.06 J
Show Text 

Forefoot Cushioning 
 

7.8
8.9

Forefoot Cushioning Picture  

Forefoot Cushioning  

See details
See details

Energy Absorbed At 800N 
 

5.22 J
5.96 J

Energy Absorbed At 1300N 
 

8.47 J
9.98 J

Energy Absorbed At 2050N 
 

11.63 J
14.61 J
Show Text 

Heel Firmness 
 

6.1
5.3

Heel Firmness  

See details
See details

Firmness At 550N 
 

46.7 N/mm
42.3 N/mm

Firmness At 1100N 
 

135.2 N/mm
118.8 N/mm

Firmness At 1900N 
 

344.3 N/mm
285.3 N/mm
Show Text 

Forefoot Firmness 
 

8.4
7.2

Forefoot Firmness  

See details
See details

Firmness At 800N 
 

105.5 N/mm
86.9 N/mm

Firmness At 1300N 
 

239.4 N/mm
179.8 N/mm

Firmness At 2050N 
 

560.0 N/mm
370.6 N/mm
Show Text 

Forefoot Long Run Cushioning 
 

7.0
7.9

Forefoot Long Run Cushioning  

See details
See details

Energy Absorbed At 10km 
 

7.59 J
8.62 J

Energy Absorbed At 20km 
 

7.44 J
8.49 J

Energy Absorbed At 30km 
 

7.34 J
8.42 J

Energy Absorbed At 40km 
 

7.28 J
8.36 J

adidas Adizero Adios Pro 4

HOKA Cielo X1 2.0

Comments

  1. Comparison

adidas Adizero Adios Pro 4 vs HOKA Cielo X1 2.0: Main Discussion

What do you think of these products? Let us know below.


Looking for a personalized buying advice from the RTINGS.com experts? Insiders have direct access to buying advice on our insider forum.

PreviewBack to editorFormat guide
No comments yet, refresh to see new ones