Walking vs. Running: Which Burns More Calories? (2026)

It seems like such a simple question. Walking or running, which one burns more calories? You’d think the answer would be obvious. Running is harder, so it must burn more. Right?

Well, yes. And also no. The real answer depends on whether you’re measuring per minute or per mile, how long you actually keep going, and whether you can sustain the activity without getting hurt. The full picture is a lot more interesting than “running wins.”

Let’s break down what the research actually says, because the answer might change which one you pick.

The Per-Minute vs. Per-Mile Problem

Here’s where most people get confused, and it’s where the walking vs running calories debate gets genuinely interesting.

Per minute, running crushes walking. That part isn’t close. According to data from the American Council on Exercise, a 160-pound person burns roughly 15.1 calories per minute running compared to about 8.7 calories per minute walking. Over a 30-minute workout, that’s approximately 453 calories running versus 261 calories walking.

Nearly double. Running wins, case closed.

Except… measure it per mile instead of per minute, and the gap shrinks dramatically.

Per mile, the difference is surprisingly small. A 2012 study published in the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research compared walking and running 1,600 meters (roughly one mile) in people with average fitness. During the exercise itself, the walk burned 372 kilojoules while the run burned 471 kilojoules. That’s about a 26% difference for covering the same distance.

So if your question is “I’m going to cover three miles today, does it matter how fast I go?” the honest answer is: it matters way less than you’d think.

But if your question is “I have 30 minutes, what gives me the most burn?” then running wins clearly.

This distinction matters more than most articles will tell you.

What the MET Values Actually Say

Scientists use something called MET values (metabolic equivalent of task) to measure how hard different activities are. One MET equals sitting on the couch doing nothing. The higher the number, the more energy your body uses.

The Compendium of Physical Activities breaks it down like this:

Walking: – Casual stroll (2.5 mph): 3.0 METs – Moderate pace (3.0 to 3.4 mph): 3.8 METs – Brisk walk (3.5 to 3.9 mph): 4.8 METs – Very brisk (4.0 to 4.4 mph): 5.5 METs

Running: – Easy jog (5.0 mph, 12 min/mile): 8.5 METs – Moderate run (6.0 mph, 10 min/mile): 9.3 METs – Faster run (7.5 mph, 8 min/mile): 11.8 METs

For a 155-pound person, you can estimate calories per minute with this formula: (METs x 3.5 x body weight in kg) / 200.

That gives you roughly:

• Brisk walk (3.5 mph): ~5.9 calories/min
• Moderate run (6.0 mph): ~11.4 calories/min

Running at a moderate pace burns about twice as many calories per minute as a brisk walk. But the brisk walker covers a mile in about 17 minutes (burning ~100 calories), while the runner covers it in 10 minutes (burning ~114 calories). Same mile, just 14% more calories for the runner.

That’s the core of this whole debate. Time versus distance tells completely different stories.

The Afterburn Effect (EPOC): Does It Change the Math?

You might have heard that running gives you an “afterburn” where your body keeps burning extra calories after you stop. This is real. Scientists call it excess post-exercise oxygen consumption, or EPOC. Your body needs extra energy after hard exercise to restore oxygen levels, clear lactic acid, repair muscle tissue, and replenish glycogen stores. All of that costs calories.

That same Wilkin et al. study measured this directly. When they included the post-exercise calorie burn, the total gap widened. Walking burned 463 kilojoules total, while running burned 664 kilojoules total. That’s a 43% difference, up from the 26% difference during exercise alone.

After running, the participants’ metabolism stayed elevated for about 15 minutes. After walking, it returned to baseline in about 10 minutes. Running also triggers more muscle repair and glycogen replenishment, all of which costs energy.

But let’s keep this in perspective. A review published in Sports Medicine found that for moderate-intensity exercise, EPOC is real but modest. We’re talking about an extra 30 to 50 calories for a typical workout, not hundreds. The afterburn effect becomes significant with very high-intensity efforts (think sprint intervals, not a steady jog). For a deeper look at how intensity affects calorie burn, check out our comparison of HIIT vs. steady state cardio.

EPOC gives running a slight edge. But it’s not the game-changer that some fitness marketing would have you believe.

Injury Risk: The Factor Nobody Wants to Talk About

Here’s where the conversation shifts from calories per mile to something more practical: can you actually keep doing this?

The injury rates tell a stark story. An epidemiological review found that the yearly injury incidence for runners falls between 37% and 56%. Harvard’s research puts it even higher, estimating that 30% to 75% of runners get hurt annually. For walkers? That number drops to about 21%.

That’s a massive difference. Running creates 2 to 3 times the impact force on your joints compared to walking. Shin splints, runner’s knee, stress fractures, plantar fasciitis… the list goes on. (If you’re dealing with that first one, we’ve got a full breakdown on why your shins hurt when you run and how to fix it.)

The best exercise for burning calories is the one you can actually do. Zero calories burned recovering on the couch with an ice pack on your knee.

If you’re new to exercise, carrying extra weight, or have joint issues, starting with walking is almost always the smarter move. You can always build up to running later.

When Walking Actually Beats Running for Total Calorie Burn

This sounds counterintuitive, but there are real scenarios where walking burns more total calories than running. It comes down to three things: duration, consistency, and dropout rates.

Duration advantage. Most people can walk for much longer than they can run. A beginner might manage 20 minutes of running before needing to stop (and let’s be honest, those last five minutes are usually more shuffling than running). That same person could easily walk for 60 or even 90 minutes at a brisk pace. At our earlier numbers, 20 minutes of running burns about 228 calories, while 60 minutes of brisk walking burns about 354 calories. The walker wins by a significant margin, simply by going longer.

Consistency advantage. Research on exercise adherence shows that dropout rates are lower and adherence rates are higher when exercise intensity is moderate rather than vigorous. People who start walking programs tend to stick with them longer than people who start running programs. Over weeks and months, that consistency adds up to significantly more total calories burned. If you’re interested in building a sustainable walking habit, our guide on walking for weight loss covers what actually works long term.

Recovery advantage. Walking requires minimal recovery. You can walk every single day without risking overuse injuries. Runners typically need rest days, and pushing through without them leads to exactly the kind of injuries we just talked about. Six walks per week easily out-burns three runs per week in total calorie expenditure.

The pattern is clear: the activity you do consistently, for longer periods, with less forced time off wins the calorie war. For many people, that activity is walking.

There’s a related factor worth mentioning: walking integrates into daily life in ways that running can’t. You can walk to the grocery store, walk during a phone call, or take a post-dinner loop around the neighborhood. These aren’t “workouts” in the traditional sense, but they add hundreds of calories to your weekly burn without requiring dedicated exercise time, special clothes, or a shower afterward. That kind of effortless accumulation is incredibly powerful for long-term calorie expenditure.

Which Should YOU Do? A Decision Framework

Stop looking for the “best” exercise and start asking which one fits your life. Here’s a practical framework:

Choose walking if:

• You’re just getting started with exercise
• You’re significantly overweight (BMI over 30)
• You have joint problems, back issues, or past injuries
• You haven’t exercised regularly in years
• You want an activity you can do daily without recovery days
• You enjoy longer, more relaxed workouts
• You’re over 50 and haven’t been running regularly

Choose running if:

• You’re already moderately fit
• You’re short on time (running delivers more burn per minute)
• You enjoy the intensity and the runner’s high
• You don’t have joint or injury concerns
• You want to build cardiovascular fitness more aggressively
• You’ve been walking consistently and want the next challenge

Choose both if:

• You want the best of both worlds (run 2 to 3 days, walk the others)
• You’re training for a race but want active recovery days
• You like variety and don’t want to burn out on one activity

Honestly? Most people would benefit from a combination. Our post on the benefits of walking, running, and cycling goes deeper on why mixing activities beats doing just one.

And here’s a thought worth sitting with: the question “which burns more calories?” might not even be the right question. Both walking and running improve cardiovascular health, boost mood, reduce disease risk, and extend lifespan. Calories are just one piece. If you pick the one you enjoy and show up for it regularly, you’ve already made the right choice.

The Calorie Burn Numbers at a Glance

For a 155-pound (70 kg) person, here’s what you’re roughly looking at:

Activity	Calories/Minute	Calories/Mile	Calories/30 Min
Walking (3.0 mph)	~3.7	~74	~111
Brisk walking (3.5 mph)	~5.9	~100	~177
Very brisk walk (4.0 mph)	~6.7	~101	~201
Easy jog (5.0 mph)	~10.4	~125	~312
Moderate run (6.0 mph)	~11.4	~114	~342
Faster run (7.5 mph)	~14.5	~116	~435

Notice how the “per mile” column barely changes once you’re above brisk walking speed? That’s the per-mile vs. per-minute difference in action. The faster you go, the more you burn per minute, but covering the same distance doesn’t add all that much more.

Your actual numbers will vary based on body weight, fitness level, terrain, and individual metabolism. Heavier people burn more calories at every speed. These are estimates, not exact figures. And for what it’s worth, you might not need as many steps as you think to see real health benefits.

Your Body Weight Changes the Equation

One detail that gets overlooked: heavier people burn more calories at every speed, during both walking and running. That’s because it takes more energy to move more mass. A 200-pound person brisk walking at 3.5 mph burns roughly 7.6 calories per minute, while a 130-pound person at the same speed burns about 5.1 calories per minute.

This means that if you’re carrying extra weight (one of the most common reasons people start exercising in the first place), walking is even more effective than the average numbers suggest. You’re burning a higher-than-average number of calories while doing a lower-impact activity that’s easier on your joints. That’s a genuinely good deal.

As you lose weight, your calorie burn per session will gradually decrease. That’s normal, not a sign that your exercise stopped working. You can compensate by walking a bit faster, going a bit longer, or adding hills.

The Bottom Line

Walking vs. running for calorie burn isn’t really a competition. It’s a spectrum. Running burns more calories per minute, no question. But per mile, the gap closes significantly. And when you factor in sustainability, injury risk, and long-term adherence, walking holds its own surprisingly well.

The best approach? Pick the one you’ll actually do. Then do it consistently.

Whether you walk or run, tracking what you eat matters as much as tracking what you burn. A good calorie tracker can help you see the full picture, because exercise is only half the equation.

And if you’re tracking your walks with one of the best walking apps in 2026, you already know that consistency beats intensity every single time.

Start where you are. Move how you can. The calories will follow.