HOKA Clifton 9 vs Clifton 10: What Changed, and Which to Buy
HOKA’s earlier comparison described 3 mm more heel foam. The cited RunRepeat samples differed by 11.7 mm at the heel, 5.0 mm at the widest toe-box point and 6.3 mm in drop, with different hardness and shock-absorption readings. These sample observations do not establish treatment benefits.
On this page
These differences can guide what to compare during fitting, but they do not make either shoe a treatment winner for heel, Achilles or forefoot pain, or prove greater stability. The earlier page records both as superseded by the Clifton 11; our 10-versus-11 comparison describes related source figures, not a fresh stock check.
Evidence status: This is a published-source specification comparison attributed to Tom Biernacki, DPM, FACFAS. No original product photos, measurements, wear-test notes or clinician-review records are available for these shoes. The brand and review-site figures are dated source reports; the laboratory figures are RunRepeat’s samples, not measurements performed by Podiatrist Tested. They do not establish comparative treatment outcomes, validated scores or a Seal award.
What HOKA says changed
The recorded HOKA comparison described compression-molded EVA, an additional 3 mm of heel cushion, a stated drop change from 5 to 8 mm, more forefoot volume and a jacquard knit upper with a double-lace lock. It listed 42 and 34 mm stack for a men’s US 10; no stack was recorded from the cited Clifton 9 brand page. The earlier launch-price sources gave $145 and $150. These remain dated reports, not new measurements or a current price check.
| Specification | Clifton 9 | Clifton 10 |
|---|---|---|
| List price | $145 | $150 at launch, later $155 |
| Stated heel-to-toe drop | 5 mm | 8 mm |
| Stated stack, men’s | Not published by HOKA | 42 and 34 mm (US 10) |
| Stated weight, men’s | 8.7 oz (247 g) | 9.8 oz (278 g) |
| Midsole | Compression-molded EVA | Compression-molded EVA, 3 mm more at the heel |
| Replaced by | Clifton 10, 2025 | Clifton 11, July 2026 |
Sources: HOKA’s US Clifton 9 page (now marked “This Product is Unavailable”) and its “Clifton 10: how it compares” page, read 28 September 2026; launch prices from Believe in the Run and our Clifton 10 vs 11 comparison. HOKA gives weights without a size. Believe in the Run listed the 9 at 32 and 27 mm, a figure HOKA does not publish.
What the lab measured
The retained RunRepeat samples differ by 11.7 mm at the heel and 5.4 mm at the forefoot, with drop readings of 6.1 and 12.4 mm. The Clifton 10 sample had wider toe-box readings, a lower hardness reading and 26 g more weight. Different sample/method results do not by themselves demonstrate a manufacturer error or a clinical advantage.
| Measurement | Clifton 9 | Clifton 10 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Toe-box width at the big toe | 68.9 mm | 73.1 mm | 4.2 mm wider |
| Width at the widest point | 92.2 mm | 97.2 mm | 5.0 mm wider |
| Toe-box height | 28.9 mm | 27.3 mm | 1.6 mm lower |
| Heel stack | 32.7 mm | 44.4 mm | 11.7 mm higher |
| Forefoot stack | 26.6 mm | 32.0 mm | 5.4 mm higher |
| Measured drop | 6.1 mm | 12.4 mm | 6.3 mm steeper |
| Weight | 249 g | 275 g | 26 g heavier |
| Midsole hardness (Asker C, higher is firmer) | 40.5 AC | 34.2 AC | About 16% lower hardness reading |
| Energy return at the heel | 53.0% | 52.3% | The same |
| Heel shock absorption | 127 SA | 147 SA | About 15% more |
| Force to bend the forefoot | 17.7 N | 14.7 N | About 17% lower bending-force reading |
| Heel counter stiffness (1 to 5) | 5 | 3 | Softer |
| Insole thickness | 4.2 mm | 4.8 mm | 0.6 mm thicker |
| Torsional rigidity (1 to 5, older method) | 4 | 5 | Stiffer |
Source: RunRepeat lab, one pair of each, read 28 September 2026, with the same toe-box, cushioning and bending tests on both shoes. Hardness is on the Asker C scale and shock absorption in RunRepeat’s SA units; torsional rigidity for both is on the lab’s older 1-to-5 scale. Medians of the lab-measured shoes we review (34 for the toe-box figures, 35 for the rest): 72.8 mm at the big toe, 95.2 mm at the widest point, 27.0 mm of toe-box height, 38.7 mm of heel stack, 8.5 mm of drop, 137 SA and 15.3 N. These are the earlier attributed sample data and comparison-set counts, not a current inventory or an independent retest. Differences between samples do not by themselves establish effects on pain, injury, balance, Achilles loading or device fit.
What these specifications can support
Stack and drop: The cited Clifton 10 sample heel is 44.4 mm, tallest of the earlier 35-shoe set and 3.1 mm above its Bondi 9 sample; the Clifton 9 heel is 32.7 mm. Drop readings are 12.4 and 6.1 mm, with the 10 fifth-highest in that set. The forefoot stack differs by 5.4 mm. These observations do not establish pain relief, plantar-load transfer, better balance or a winner for Achilles, neuroma or other forefoot symptoms. The drop chart gives geometry and evidence limits.
Toe-box measurements: The cited 10 sample was 4.2 mm wider at the big toe and 5.0 mm wider at the widest point. The latter readings were 97.2 versus 92.2 mm; the earlier dataset ranked the 9 narrowest and the 10 joint fourth of 34. Heights were 27.3 and 28.9 mm, a 1.6 mm difference. These are sample dimensions, not proof of overall volume or fit across every width, bunion or hammertoe. Our toe-box chart compares the attributed figures.
Hardness, absorption and stiffness: The cited 10 sample recorded 147 SA versus 127 SA, about 15% higher and fourth of the earlier 35-shoe set. Its hardness reading was about 16% lower and bending force about 17% lower; heel-counter scores were 3 and 5 on the cited scale. These are distinct construction measurements. They do not prove fat-pad or plantar-fasciitis relief, big-toe symptom aggravation or a heel-control outcome.
Which should you buy?
Compare the Clifton 10 when…
- You want to compare the cited heel shock-absorption readings, about 15% apart with the 10 fourth of the earlier 35-shoe set. This is not a pain-relief ranking.
- You want to compare the 12.4 mm sample drop. A tendon or calf symptom does not establish that this model is preferred.
- You want to try the sample’s larger widest-point reading, 5.0 mm wider. Verify actual width, height and rubbing rather than choosing by diagnosis alone.
- You want to compare its taller stack and lower hardness reading. There is no documented PT all-day comfort or treatment outcome.
Compare a Clifton 9 listing when…
- You want to compare the 6.1 mm sample drop with 12.4 mm, while checking its narrower widest-point measurement. These do not prescribe a model for forefoot pain.
- You want to compare a sample heel stack almost 12 mm lower. The reading does not establish ankle stability, fall prevention or better balance.
- You want to compare the forefoot bending-force readings. The 9 required about 20% more force in the cited test; that does not establish a preferred model for a stiff joint.
- You want to compare a cited heel-counter score of 5 versus 3 and sample weight 26 g lower. These are construction differences, not proven heel control or comfort.
Orthotics and inserts
The earlier sources describe removable insoles; the cited thicknesses are 4.8 and 4.2 mm. Toe-box heights are 27.3 and 28.9 mm, and widths and heel-counter scores also differ. Those measurements do not establish usable interior volume, broad-device clearance or more secure orthotic heel-cup fit. Check the exact prescribed device in the actual shoe. The device-fit guide describes fitting checks, not completed clearance ratings.
Questions runners ask
Is the HOKA Clifton 10 better than the Clifton 9?
The cited samples differ in heel stack, drop, toe-box dimensions, hardness and shock absorption. Those figures do not establish better heel, Achilles or forefoot-pain outcomes or greater ankle stability. Compare actual fit and activity needs; no original PT wear or treatment comparison is available.
What is the difference between the HOKA Clifton 9 and Clifton 10?
The earlier HOKA comparison described 3 mm more heel foam, a stated drop change from 5 to 8 mm, more forefoot volume and a jacquard knit upper with a double-lace lock. RunRepeat’s cited samples differed by 11.7 mm in heel stack, with drop readings of 6.1 and 12.4 mm, 5.0 mm more widest-point width and 26 g more weight. Source methods and samples differ.
Is the Clifton 10 wider than the Clifton 9?
In the cited samples, the 10 was 4.2 mm wider at the big toe and 5.0 mm wider at the widest point (97.2 versus 92.2 mm), while its toe box was 1.6 mm lower. Earlier sources listed Regular, Wide and X-Wide. The samples do not test every size/width or establish fit for a particular foot.
Does the Clifton 10 have more drop than the Clifton 9?
The dated HOKA figures are 5 and 8 mm. The cited laboratory samples measured 6.1 and 12.4 mm; the 10 was fifth-highest in the earlier 35-shoe set. These source-specific figures are not a validated treatment range or an automatic reason to change shoes for a symptom.
Is the Clifton 9 discontinued?
The earlier page recorded replacement by the Clifton 10 in 2025 and a HOKA unavailable notice on 28 September 2026; it also recorded a Clifton 11 release in July 2026. These are historical reports, not a fresh availability check or proof that every retailer and size is out of stock.
Should I buy the Clifton 11 instead?
A later model is not automatically a better fit or treatment option. The earlier comparison recorded an 8 mm stated drop and a sample heel 3 mm lower, big-toe width 2.2 mm narrower and lower hardness than the 10. These are attributed sample observations; our Clifton 10-versus-11 comparison gives related source details. Try the actual pair.
Read the full analysis
Our spec analyses of the Clifton 10 and the Clifton 11 carry each shoe’s full figures and sources. For the Clifton against HOKA’s maximum-cushion shoe, see Bondi 9 vs Clifton 10, and for heel pain across the range, HOKA shoes for plantar fasciitis.
Sources
- HOKA, Clifton 9 men’s product page (marked unavailable; 8.70 oz, 5.00 mm drop, compression-molded EVA), read 28 September 2026.
- HOKA, “Clifton 10: how it compares” (42 and 34 mm in a men’s US 10, 8 mm drop, 3 mm more foam, more forefoot volume, jacquard knit upper), read 28 September 2026.
- Believe in the Run, HOKA Clifton 9 review (launch price $145; 32 and 27 mm listed stack), read 28 September 2026. Clifton 10 price and widths as recorded in our Clifton 10 vs 11 comparison (September 2026).
- RunRepeat, HOKA Clifton 9 and HOKA Clifton 10 lab reviews, read 28 September 2026.
Correction (9 October 2026): Qualified unsupported treatment-winner, load, stability and orthotic-clearance inferences while retaining the attributed manufacturer and outside-lab figures. Source dates and earlier availability reports remain historical; no new product test or clinician-review sign-off is claimed. ACFAS heel-pain guidance provides clinical context, not evidence that either compared model is a treatment winner.
Recently reviewed
Individual shoe pages state their evidence tier, published measurements and who should skip them.
Saucony Endorphin Speed 5
Spec AnalysisLight plated neutral trainer. Saucony publishes both stack heights and they match its 8 mm drop — not yet tested.
HOKA Mach 6
Spec AnalysisLower, firmer neutral HOKA. HOKA publishes a 5 mm drop and neither stack height — not yet tested.
ASICS Novablast 5
Spec AnalysisBouncy high-stack neutral. ASICS publishes an 8 mm drop and neither stack height — not yet tested.
Our funding and evidence policy
We earn affiliate commissions from qualifying purchases. Our policy is to assess published evidence and fit needs rather than rank products by commission rate. Current reviews are specification analyses; see our method for their limits.