New Balance FuelCell SuperComp Elite v4 vs Nike Alphafly 3: Which Running Shoe Is Better?

FEEDBACK

Products

Tested using Methodology v0.12

Updated Sep 23, 2026 02:09 PM

SEE PRICE

Amazon

Tested using Methodology v1.0

Updated Oct 22, 2026 05:14 PM

SEE PRICE

Amazon

New Balance FuelCell SuperComp Elite v4 Picture

Heel Stack Height 39.5 mm

Weight 239.9 g (8.46 oz)

Heel-To-Toe Drop 4.7 mm

Plate Carbon Fiber

Heel Stack Height 39.8 mm

Weight 200.7 g (7.08 oz)

Heel-To-Toe Drop 6.4 mm

Plate Carbon Fiber

Our Verdict

New Balance FuelCell SuperComp Elite v4

Nike Alphafly 3

The New Balance FuelCell SuperComp Elite v4 and Nike Alphafly 3 are both marathon racers, but the Nike is lighter and more race-focused. The New Balance has a roomier fit and more cushioning, making it the more accommodating option for a wider range of runners. Get the Nike if you prioritize race-day efficiency; get the New Balance if you want more room and a softer long-distance ride.

Variants

FuelCell SuperComp Elite v4 (Cyber Jade/White/Black - (Men - US 9))
FuelCell SuperComp Elite v4 (Cyber Jade/White/Black - (Women - US 7))

Alphafly 3 (Black/Olive Aura/Metallic Silver - (Men - US 9))
Alphafly 3 (Bright Crimson/Lime Blast/Mint Foam/Cave Purple - (Men - US 9))

Review

See New Balance FuelCell SuperComp Elite v4 Review

See Nike Alphafly 3 Review

Check Price

DicksSportingGoods.com

DicksSportingGoods.com

Notice: Two or more of the products being compared have been tested with different test methodologies. Some of the results aren't directly comparable. Learn how our test benches and scoring system work, and read more about the latest changes to our running shoes test methodology.

Threshold

0.10

Half/Full Marathon Racing

7.8

8.2

Weight

6.8

8.1

Full Comparison

Half/Full Marathon Racing

7.8

8.2

5K/10K Racing

7.4

8.1

Long Run

7.7

7.6

Daily Training

6.4

6.3

Design

Energy Return

8.1

8.2

Stability

6.9

Cushioning

8.1

7.8

Traction

4.6

Outsole Durability

6.0

Wet & Warm Weather

8.0

Bounciness

8.2

7.0

Snappiness

8.2

Roll

7.9

True To Size

9.6

9.0

Design

Weight

6.8

8.1

Right Shoe Weight Photo

Compare High-Res

Left Shoe Weight Photo

Compare High-Res

Weight

239.9 g (8.46 oz)

200.7 g (7.08 oz)

Stack Heights

Stack Height Photo

Compare High-Res

Heel Stack Height

39.5 mm

39.8 mm

Forefoot Stack Height

35.9 mm

33.4 mm

Heel-To-Toe Drop

4.7 mm

6.4 mm

Advertised Heel-To-Toe Drop

4.0 mm

8.0 mm

External Shape

3D Model Full Shoe

Preview 3D

Outsole Heel Width

86 mm (3.4")

91 mm (3.6")

Outsole Arch Width

74 mm (2.9")

68 mm (2.7")

Outsole Forefoot Width

111 mm (4.4")

116 mm (4.6")

Heel Width-To-Stack Ratio

2.17

2.29

Forefoot Width-To-Stack Ratio

3.09

3.47

Internal Shape

3D Model Internal

Preview 3D

Internal Length

270 mm (10.6")

273 mm (10.7")

Internal Heel Width

58 mm (2.3")

59 mm (2.3")

Internal Forefoot Width

95 mm (3.8")

90 mm (3.5")

Wide Sizing Available

Yes

Forefoot Fit: Width

9.0

9.4

Forefoot Width Photo

Compare High-Res

Ball-Of-Foot TTS Deviation

3.8 mm (0.149")

-0.8 mm (-0.032")

Toe TTS Deviation

3.9 mm (0.152")

-2.2 mm (-0.087")

Forefoot Fit: Height

9.7

Forefoot Height Photo

Compare High-Res

Toe TTS Deviation

1.8 mm (0.072")

-0.8 mm (-0.030")

Arch Fit: Width

9.6

6.2

Arch Fit Photo

Compare High-Res

Arch Width TTS Deviation

-1.0 mm (-0.040")

-5.6 mm (-0.219")

Length Fit

Toe Clearance Photo

Compare High-Res

Heel Rocker Geometry

7.9

6.6

Heel Rocker Photo

Compare High-Res

Heel Spring

25 mm (1.0")

16 mm (0.6")

Heel Apex Position

23.2%

15.3%

Heel Rocker Angle

20.7°

21.3°

Forefoot Rocker Geometry

8.6

6.7

Forefoot Rocker Photo

Compare High-Res

Toe Spring

65 mm (2.6")

45 mm (1.8")

Toe Apex Position

57.7%

66.4%

Forefoot Rocker Angle

28.4°

26.6°

Foam

Primary Foam Picture

Secondary Foam Picture

Primary Foam Name

ZoomX

Primary Foam Type

PEBA

Secondary Foam Name

No Secondary Foam

Secondary Foam Type

No Secondary Foam

Laces

Laces Picture

Lace Type

Sawtooth

Width

6.0 mm (0.2")

Thickness

1.2 mm (0.0")

Stretch

10.5%

Breathability

7.5

Breathability Video

Upper Breathability

Upper Microscope Photo

Time-To-Dry

8.1

Time-To-Dry Timelapse

Time-To-Dry Graph

Preview Graph

Time To 30% Dry

5.1 hrs

Time To 70% Dry

14.9 hrs

Time To Dry

24.3 hrs

Water Absorption

8.4

Dry Weight Photo

Wet Weight Photo

Water Absorbed

35.6%

Other Features

Other Features Photo

Compare High-Res

Tongue Gusset Type

Non-gusseted

Plate

Carbon Fiber

Performance

Heel Compression Energy Return

8.2

Heel Compression Video

Heel Energy Return

Preview Graph

Heel Energy Return

81.9%

82.0%

Forefoot Compression Energy Return

8.1

8.2

Forefoot Compression Video

Forefoot Energy Return

Preview Graph

Forefoot Energy Return

81.4%

82.2%

Heel Cushioning

7.8

7.6

Heel Cushioning Picture

Compare High-Res

Heel Cushioning

Preview Graph

Energy Absorbed At 550N

3.77 J

3.82 J

Energy Absorbed At 1100N

9.44 J

9.18 J

Energy Absorbed At 1900N

15.67 J

14.96 J

Forefoot Cushioning

8.3

8.0

Forefoot Cushioning Picture

Compare High-Res

Forefoot Cushioning

Preview Graph

Energy Absorbed At 800N

5.23 J

4.68 J

Energy Absorbed At 1300N

9.07 J

8.55 J

Energy Absorbed At 2050N

13.24 J

13.10 J

Heel Firmness

7.4

Heel Firmness Graph

Preview Graph

Firmness At 550N

39.3 N/mm

38.8 N/mm

Firmness At 1100N

51.9 N/mm

52.3 N/mm

Firmness At 1900N

74.5 N/mm

75.9 N/mm

Forefoot Firmness

7.0

7.9

Forefoot Firmness Graph

Preview Graph

Firmness At 800N

52.2 N/mm

57.0 N/mm

Firmness At 1300N

68.1 N/mm

73.1 N/mm

Firmness At 2050N

95 N/mm

99 N/mm

Forefoot Long Run Cushioning

7.4

7.8

Forefoot Long Run Cushioning

Preview Graph

Nike Alphafly 3 Forefoot Long Run Cushioning

Energy Absorbed At 10km

7.99 J

8.41 J

Energy Absorbed At 20km

7.88 J

8.33 J

Energy Absorbed At 30km

7.81 J

8.27 J

Energy Absorbed At 40km

7.76 J

8.24 J

Rocker Stiffness

7.8

7.9

Forefoot Rocker Stiffness Video

Forefoot Rocker Stiffness Graph

Preview Graph

Nike Alphafly 3 Forefoot Rocker Stiffness Graph

Force To Flatten The Rocker

111 N

117 N

Forefoot Bending Energy Return

8.2

8.0

Forefoot Bending Video

Forefoot Bending Energy Return

Preview Graph

Forefoot Bending Energy Return

73.0%

71.3%

Forefoot Bending Stiffness

8.3

9.5

Forefoot Bending Resistance Picture

Compare High-Res

Forefoot Bending Resistance

Preview Graph

Nike Alphafly 3 Forefoot Bending Resistance

Forefoot Bending Stiffness

21.0 N/mm

41.6 N/mm

Forefoot Bending Force

357 N

484 N

Forefoot Compression Depth

6.1

Forefoot Compression Graph

Preview Graph

Forefoot Compression At 800N

14.0 mm

Forefoot Compression At 1300N

17.8 mm

Forefoot Compression At 2050N

20.6 mm

Heel Compression Depth

6.3

Heel Compression Graph

Preview Graph

Heel Compression At 550N

Sliding Force

60.0 N (13.5 lbf)

Coefficient Of Friction

0.36

Exposed Foam

6.0

Outsole Photo

Heel Exposed Foam

4.0

Forefoot Exposed Foam

8.0

Outsole Abrasion Wear

6.0

Outsole Durability Video

Outsole Durability Photo

Heel Abrasion Wear

4.0

Forefoot Abrasion Wear

8.0

Check Price

DicksSportingGoods.com

DicksSportingGoods.com

New Balance FuelCell SuperComp Elite v4

Nike Alphafly 3

Comments

Comparison

• Posted 1 year ago

New Balance FuelCell SuperComp Elite v4 vs Nike Alphafly 3: 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.

PreviewBack to editorFormat guide

No comments yet, refresh to see new ones

To access

Become a member

New Balance FuelCell SuperComp Elite v4 vs Nike Alphafly 3

Which Running Shoe Is Better?

Products

Our Verdict

Variants

Review

Check Price

Main Differences for Half/Full Marathon Racing

Threshold

Half/Full Marathon Racing

Weight See Details

Full Comparison

Half/Full Marathon Racing

5K/10K Racing

Long Run

Daily Training

Design

Design

Energy Return

Stability

Cushioning

Traction

Outsole Durability

Wet & Warm Weather

Bounciness

Snappiness

Roll

True To Size

Weight

Right Shoe Weight Photo

Left Shoe Weight Photo

Weight

Stack Heights

Stack Height Photo

Heel Stack Height

Forefoot Stack Height

Heel-To-Toe Drop

Advertised Heel-To-Toe Drop

External Shape

3D Model Full Shoe

Outsole Heel Width

Outsole Arch Width

Outsole Forefoot Width

Heel Width-To-Stack Ratio

Forefoot Width-To-Stack Ratio

Internal Shape

3D Model Internal

Internal Length

Internal Heel Width

Internal Forefoot Width

Wide Sizing Available

Forefoot Fit: Width

Forefoot Width Photo

Ball-Of-Foot TTS Deviation

Toe TTS Deviation

Forefoot Fit: Height

Forefoot Height Photo

Toe TTS Deviation

Arch Fit: Width

Arch Fit Photo

Arch Width TTS Deviation

Length Fit

Toe Clearance Photo

Heel Rocker Geometry

Heel Rocker Photo

Heel Spring

Heel Apex Position

Heel Rocker Angle

Forefoot Rocker Geometry

Forefoot Rocker Photo

Toe Spring

Toe Apex Position

Forefoot Rocker Angle

Foam

Primary Foam Picture

Secondary Foam Picture

Primary Foam Name

Primary Foam Type

Secondary Foam Name

Secondary Foam Type

Main Differences for

Half/Full Marathon Racing

Weight