HOKA Rocket X 3 vs Cielo X1 2.0

Which Running Shoe Is Better?

Products

HOKA Rocket X 3
HOKA Cielo X1 2.0

Tested using Methodology v0.9

Updated Oct 27, 2025 07:04 PM

SEE PRICE
Hoka.com

Tested using Methodology v0.9

Updated Nov 14, 2025 09:31 PM

SEE PRICE
Hoka.com

Our Verdict

HOKA Rocket X 3

HOKA Cielo X1 2.0

The HOKA Rocket X 3 and HOKA Cielo X1 2.0 are both carbon-plated racing shoes, but they target different types of runners and distances with distinct design philosophies. The Rocket X 3 leans into stability and consistency, with a wider base that provides confidence under fatigue. It delivers a firmer, more structured ride with a smooth and predictable rocker, especially suited for marathon efforts and tempo runs where durability matters. In contrast, the Cielo X1 2.0 is lighter, softer, and more aggressive, built for runners who want to stay up on the forefoot and let the rocker do the work. It's very energetic but noticeably less stable, particularly in the rearfoot or at slower speeds. The Cielo favors midfoot and forefoot strikers who maintain efficient form throughout a race, while the Rocket is better for runners who appreciate a touch more control and a bit of extra room in the toebox.

 

0 

Variants

  • Rocket X 3 (White/Black - (Men - US 9))
  • Rocket X 3 (White/Black - (Women - US 7))
  • 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 

8.4
8.4
No major differences between these running shoes for marathon racing. See full list of tests below.

Full Comparison

Design

Weight  

7.9
8.0

Right Shoe Weight Photo  

Left Shoe Weight Photo  

Weight 
 

208.4 g (7.35 oz)
204.6 g (7.22 oz)
Show Text 

Stack Heights 
 

Stack Height Photo  

Heel Stack Height 
 

40.3 mm
40.5 mm

Forefoot Stack Height 
 

31.7 mm
31.6 mm

Heel-To-Toe Drop 
 

8.6 mm
8.9 mm

Advertised Heel-To-Toe Drop 
 

7.0 mm
7.0 mm
Show Text 

External Shape 
 

3D Model Full Shoe  

Outsole Heel Width 
 

76 mm (3.0")
74 mm (2.9")

Outsole Arch Width 
 

69 mm (2.7")
48 mm (1.9")

Outsole Forefoot Width 
 

107 mm (4.2")
108 mm (4.2")

Heel Width-To-Stack Ratio 
 

1.89
1.83

Forefoot Width-To-Stack Ratio 
 

3.38
3.42

Internal Shape 
 

3D Model Internal  

Internal Length 
 

274 mm (10.8")
269 mm (10.6")

Internal Heel Width 
 

65 mm (2.6")
63 mm (2.5")

Internal Forefoot Width 
 

94 mm (3.7")
90 mm (3.6")

Wide Sizing Available 
 

No
No
Show Text 

Other Features  

Other Features Photo  

Tongue Gusset Type 
 

Non-gusseted
Semi-gusseted

Plate 
 

Carbon Fiber
Carbon Fiber
Show Text 
Performance

Heel Energy Return 
 

8.5
8.3

Heel Compression Video  

Heel Energy Return  

See details
See details

Heel Energy Return 
 

83.7%
82.5%
Show Text 

Forefoot Energy Return 
 

8.5
8.5

Forefoot Compression Video  

Forefoot Energy Return  

See details
See details

Forefoot Energy Return 
 

83.8%
83.6%
Show Text 

Heel Cushioning 
 

8.3
8.9

Heel Cushioning Picture  

Heel Cushioning  

See details
See details

Energy Absorbed At 550N 
 

4.40 J
5.04 J

Energy Absorbed At 1100N 
 

10.16 J
11.12 J

Energy Absorbed At 1900N 
 

15.84 J
17.06 J
Show Text 

Forefoot Cushioning 
 

7.9
8.9

Forefoot Cushioning Picture  

Forefoot Cushioning  

See details
See details

Energy Absorbed At 800N 
 

5.14 J
5.96 J

Energy Absorbed At 1300N 
 

8.44 J
9.98 J

Energy Absorbed At 2050N 
 

12.09 J
14.61 J
Show Text 

Heel Firmness 
 

5.8
5.3

Heel Firmness  

See details
See details

Firmness At 550N 
 

46.8 N/mm
42.3 N/mm

Firmness At 1100N 
 

124.4 N/mm
118.8 N/mm

Firmness At 1900N 
 

305.2 N/mm
285.3 N/mm
Show Text 

Forefoot Firmness 
 

8.2
7.2

Forefoot Firmness  

See details
See details

Firmness At 800N 
 

108.3 N/mm
86.9 N/mm

Firmness At 1300N 
 

223.2 N/mm
179.8 N/mm

Firmness At 2050N 
 

462.5 N/mm
370.6 N/mm
Show Text 

Forefoot Long Run Cushioning 
 

7.6
7.9

Forefoot Long Run Cushioning  

See details
See details

Energy Absorbed At 10km 
 

8.27 J
8.62 J

Energy Absorbed At 20km 
 

8.16 J
8.49 J

Energy Absorbed At 30km 
 

8.08 J
8.42 J

Energy Absorbed At 40km 
 

8.02 J
8.36 J

HOKA Rocket X 3

HOKA Cielo X1 2.0

Comments

  1. Comparison

HOKA Rocket X 3 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