On Cloudflyer 5 review

After testing the On Cloudflyer 5 in our lab, our analysis confirms it's ideally suited for:

• Runners who prioritise comfort and solid build quality—this shoe excels in these areas.
• Those dealing with stability issues, seeking a durable, well-constructed shoe for easy miles and all-day wear.
• Fans of the Cloudflyer 4, as this update maintains its familiar DNA while improving nearly every detail except weight.

In our experience, the Cloudflyer 5 falls short for runners who prioritise performance. Despite its first-class comfort and solid construction, we found the weight to be excessive, making it feel cumbersome. For runners who consider weight a dealbreaker, we recommend exploring options like the ASICS GT 2000 13 or Altra Experience Form, which strike a better balance.

We also believe the firm Helion midsole won’t appeal to many runners. While it delivers incredible stability, it sacrifices too much in plushness, delivering a ride that feels neither fun nor lively. For those craving a softer experience, we suggest the ASICS Gel Kayano 31 as a preferable alternative.

At first glance, the weight might suggest a maximalist design, but in our lab measurements, we found the stack height closer to that of an average running shoe—just 33.2 mm. Thankfully, it’s not any taller, as additional height would have made it even heavier, which could have been a disaster.

The forefoot sits notably lower than the heel, giving a grounded, less towering feel—especially noticeable at faster paces. We confirmed this firsthand, measuring precisely and finding 25.3 mm of height.

On shoes generally feature a 6-mm heel-to-toe drop, but in our experience, the Cloudflyer series consistently stands out as an exception for the Swiss brand. In the previous model, On claimed 11.0 mm—we measured 9.8 mm. In this fifth edition, we recorded 7.9 mm, a bit shy of their 10-mm claim.

In other words, while most On shoes lean toward a medium drop, the Cloudflyer is geared more for heel strikers, aiming for a high-drop design. We believe that’s a solid choice for a stability-focused shoe.

Now we arrive at one of the most interesting aspects of the Cloudflyer 5. On has replicated the dual-density Helion (EVA + Olefin) midsole from its predecessor, which translates to a firm foam layer (28.0 HA) in the forefoot and midfoot, paired with an ultra-firm secondary layer in the heel for enhanced stability.

While we don't like the current “softer is better” trend in the running shoe industry, we have to say this midsole feels simply too firm. Even with the CloudTec technology facilitating compression, we wonder if On’s engineers were inspired by stone or concrete!

That said, a firm-like-a-brick midsole comes with side benefits like remarkable support, and for those who experience discomfort with softer midsoles, this option could be a pleasant change. But remember—if you’re looking for something soft underfoot, this shoe it's not for you.

As we mentioned earlier, the Cloudflyer 5 employs a dual-foam setup, with a noticeably firmer slab of Helion foam (37.0 HA) in the heel, marked by its grey colour.

This denser section extends more into the midfoot on the medial side, helping to contain lateral forces and keeping the foot centred—ideal for pronators.

From our perspective, this design delivers on stability. However, it also makes the ride feel quite clunky, and we believe only those who genuinely prefer a firm, grounded sensation underfoot will fully appreciate this shoe’s feel.

We found the Helion foam held up decently in our freezer. Unlike standard EVA, which can become too firm in the cold, this foam’s blend of EVA and OBC (Olefin Block Co-Polymers) just got 32.1% firmer, which is not awesome, but better than most plain EVAs.

The insole isn’t your average running shoe insole—it’s a touch more premium, featuring double-density foam that genuinely impressed us as it's extremely rare in footbeds!

In the lab, we measured it at 4.8 mm, right within standard range in terms of thickness.

On has taken a different path from models like the Cloudsurfer 7, crafting a flat, non-rockered midsole that prioritises stability. This design choice makes the shoe less dynamic, particularly for heel strikers.

It's neither a strength nor a drawback—just a different approach to running shoe design. Some may appreciate the flatter profile on a stability-focused shoe, which provides a secure feel. Others might wish for a bit more liveliness with a slightly curved sole. Which group are you in?

Some of you may have guessed that with the Cloudflyer’s midsole now larger than ever, it might also offer a roomier fit. Well, not quite. While the toebox is slightly more spacious than before, we measured it at 98.2 mm at its widest—still mostly average.

The toebox also features a medium-to-low volume forefoot, which means that runners who naturally point the big toe upward may experience slight pressure in this area.

We recorded a second width measurement in the big toe area at 78.4 mm, perfectly matching our findings in testing. If we had to define the fit of the Cloudflyer, we’d say that it's neither spacious nor snug, simply comfortably average.

Thanks to this width, the Cloudflyer 5 gains a boost in stability—the combination of a standard-width toebox and a broader landing base offers naturally enhanced support.

The two standout features of this shoe are its plush upper and impressive stability. We've already detailed the former, so let’s dive into the latter.

The Cloudflyer 5 elevates the support of its predecessor, utilising a clever mix of stability-enhancing elements—like the dual-foam setup, a plastic heel clip in the calcaneus area, and a broader base in the heel and forefoot. Together, these features work to keep the foot securely centred and grounded.

We found the torsional rigidity of the Cloudflyer 5 to be on the higher side, as expected in most stability shoes, scoring 4/5 on our scale. It avoided a max 5 due to the strategically placed grooves in the outsole.

In our experience, the heel counter is comfort-focused at 3/5 in our scale, just like its predecessor.

Rather than opting for an ultra-stiff design commonly found in shoes for pronators, On prioritises plushness here, relying on a lower plastic heel clip for stability and skipping the extra rigidity around the Achilles area. We appreciate this choice, especially for those planning to wear the CF5 for long hours on their feet.

One of the signature elements of many On shoes—even their supertrainers like the Cloudmonster Hyper—is the sleek, narrow midsole. However, in our view, such a streamlined design is a mistake in a stability-focused shoe.

That’s why we discovered a much broader 119.0 mm forefoot width in the Cloudflyer 5—a supportive choice for all runners dealing with pronation or supination concerns.

The heel is where this shoe truly shines in terms of added support and stability. The redesigned midsole now measures a broader 100.1 mm, a significant upgrade from the 90.3 mm we noted in version 4.

This expanded width is particularly impactful, as the shoe is designed with heel strikers in mind. In our view, the Cloudflyer 5 finally meets the needs of heel strikers who may have found the previous model lacking despite its high drop.

The firm midsole makes achieving optimal flexibility a bit challenging, but On addressed this by incorporating multiple grooves in both the midsole and outsole.

In our 90-degree bend test, we measured a stiffness of 28.9N. That's a solid result that confirms this shoe’s versatility for everyday tasks alongside running, of course!

For petrolheads, it’s easy to draw analogies with running shoes—if we had to compare the Cloudflyer 5 to a car, it would be an Audi A8: incredibly stable, luxuriously comfortable... and undeniably heavy!

In our view, this is one of the two main drawbacks of the Cloudflyer 5. Despite its plush upper and tank-like outsole, we believe this shoe should be closer to 10 oz, but it tipped the scales at 11.6 oz or 329g.

For this reason, anyone expecting the lightweight feel of trainers like the ASICS Novablast 4 or Nike Pegasus Plus may be disappointed. However, runners who prioritise comfort and durability over weight will likely love the Cloudflyer 5.

Initially, we had reservations about breathability in the Cloudflyer 5, as its upper appeared less airy than the one we tested on the Cloudflyer 4. But we were wrong.

Despite an upgrade in plushness and material quality, the fifth version manages to expel air with ease, earning the same 4/5 rating as its predecessor—but now with even greater comfort.

Using a flashlight, we discovered how On did it. Ventilation holes run strategically through the toebox and midfoot, with only minor interruption from the semi-gusseted tongue—a design that doesn’t impact airflow, as it’s positioned further back.

To understand the refined construction of this upper, we examined the Cloudflyer 5 under a microscope. We discovered a multi-layered engineered mesh with a crisscrossing pattern that performs impressively—at least in terms of breathability. We'll see what happens regarding durability next.

The upper is amazing, with ample padding in high-comfort zones like the heel and tongue, while noticeably thinner in areas requiring airflow. 

We believe there’s zero risk of hotspots or discomfort, making it perfect for all-day wear. In fact, it’s among the finest uppers we’ve encountered in the lab—truly exceptional!

Starting with its standout breathability and plush comfort, we were curious if this luxurious design would compromise durability—a common trade-off in many running shoes.

We tested the engineered mesh upper with our Dremel and observed less wear than usual, earning the CF5 a solid 4/5 durability rating, way better than the 1/5 of its predecessor. This result impressed us, as few toebox designs manage to both release heat efficiently and resist wear at this level.

Inspired by the impressive results from our initial tests on the Cloudflyer 5, we fired up the Dremel again to examine the heel padding wear.

And, despite being version 5, this shoe appears to favour the number four—scoring another solid 4/5 in durability.

To assess the hardness of the Cloudflyer 5’s outsole rubber, we pressed our Shore C durometer against it and recorded a solid 83.3 HC.

We noted that the outsole looks strikingly similar to the On Cloudmonster 2. Large rubber patches cover the sides of the heel and forefoot, enhancing durability, while a central groove provides flexibility—though it may occasionally snag a rock.

In terms of durability, we were pleased with the results of our third Dremel test.

The trial produced a minimal 0.8 mm indentation, reinforcing that while this shoe comes at a premium, at least its outsole delivers impressive grip and wear resistance.

To conclude the outsole chapter , we measured the thickness and found it at 4.0 mm—overkill if you ask us.

While stability shoes typically feature thicker outsoles to handle the wear patterns of runners with pronation, we believe 4.0 mm here may be excessive. The added thickness increases weight and creates a notably firm ride. With such a wear-resistant rubber, we think a more balanced 2.5 mm or 3.0 mm would have been ideal.

As with most On running shoes, they’re priced a bit higher than many other brands, leaving the choice to the customer.

Do we think this shoe is worth a premium price? Based on feel and quality, probably yes. However, we’ve had better running experiences with less expensive options, which made us question the overall value.

It’s great to see reflective elements on the Cloudflyer 5, especially since it’s the On logo that lights up—a clever touch. These small details are exactly what we look for in the lab when we dissect and analyze a premium-priced shoe.

The 9.9-mm tongue truly embodies the luxurious approach On has taken with this shoe, showcasing a triple-layer construction and a plush slab of soft foam in the centre—a true treat for your instep!

In our view, the lacing system complements this high-quality design perfectly. The flat, durable laces glide easily through punched eyelets, staying secure with ease. The only exception is the first eyelet, designed as a lace loop, which we feel could have been skipped, as it seems a bit gimmicky.

We loved that the tongue is securely fixed to the sides, without feeling tight or restrictive. A small, elastic piece of fabric anchors it to the midsole, holding it perfectly in place while running—a flawless execution in our view. We wish more running shoes had this!

No surprises in the heel design. On typically includes pull tabs on their trail shoes but often opts for a sleek, tab-free look on road models. While we’re big fans of pull tabs, this clean design choice is one we fully embrace.

We experienced no issues whatsoever removing the insole, but keep in mind that replacing it will lose the heel’s contoured shape, which provides initial stability for your foot.