vsversusfinder

New Balance Women's Fresh Foam 520 V9 Running vs Saucony Women's Cohesion 16 Sneaker, Mist/Indigo, 10

Updated August 2026 — New Balance Women's Fresh Foam 520 V9 Running wins on weight and comfort, Saucony Women's Cohesion 16 Sneaker, Mist/Indigo, 10 wins on price and durability.

The New Balance Women's Fresh Foam 520 V9 offers superior lightweight comfort and breathability, while the Saucony Women's Cohesion 16 is a more budget-friendly option with solid cushioning.

Why New Balance Women's Fresh Foam 520 V9 Running is better

Lightweight

New Balance weighs just over 200 grams.

Breathability

New Balance features a breathable mesh upper.

Sales Rank

New Balance has a higher bestseller rank.

Why Saucony Women's Cohesion 16 Sneaker, Mist/Indigo, 10 is better

Price

Saucony is priced at $54.63.

Cushioning

Saucony offers VERSARUN cushioning.

Durability

Saucony has a strong reputation for durability.

Overall score

New Balance Women's Fresh Foam 520 V9 Running
85
Saucony Women's Cohesion 16 Sneaker, Mist/Indigo, 10
78

Specifications

SpecNew Balance Women's Fresh Foam 520 V9 RunningSaucony Women's Cohesion 16 Sneaker, Mist/Indigo, 10
CushioningFresh FoamVERSARUN
OutsoleRubberRubber
UpperMeshMesh
Sales Rank317322129
Current Price$59.99$54.63

Dimension comparison

New Balance Women's Fresh Foam 520 V9 RunningSaucony Women's Cohesion 16 Sneaker, Mist/Indigo, 10

Price Comparison

The New Balance Women's Fresh Foam 520 V9 Running Shoe is priced at $59.99, while the Saucony Women's Cohesion 16 Sneaker is available for $54.63. This makes the Saucony option about 9% cheaper than the New Balance shoe. While the price difference may seem minimal, it can influence the decision for budget-conscious shoppers. Over the past 90 days, the average price for the New Balance shoe has been around $58.58, indicating it has been relatively stable. In contrast, the Saucony sneaker's average price over the same period was $57.68, showing a slight fluctuation but still landing it at a lower current price point.

Comfort and Cushioning

When it comes to comfort, the New Balance Women's Fresh Foam 520 V9 features fresh foam cushioning that provides responsive comfort on the road. This shoe is designed to keep the feet cool and dry during workouts, thanks to its breathable mesh upper. On the other hand, the Saucony Women's Cohesion 16 offers VERSARUN cushioning, which absorbs impact and reduces pressure during runs. Both shoes prioritize comfort, but the New Balance shoe emphasizes a lightweight design, tipping the scales at just over 200 grams. This weight advantage may appeal to runners seeking a barely-there feel.

Durability and Outsole Performance

The New Balance 520 V9 boasts a durable rubber outsole designed to provide reliable traction on various running surfaces. This feature is particularly beneficial for those who enjoy running outdoors or on mixed terrains. Comparatively, the Saucony Cohesion 16 also features a rubber outsole that ensures a smooth feel and durability over many miles. The design takes cues from trusted styles, indicating a focus on longevity. While both shoes have strong durability credentials, the specific traction performance of the New Balance may serve runners who prioritize grip on diverse surfaces.

Fit and Design

In terms of fit and design, the New Balance Women's Fresh Foam 520 V9 includes a simple lace-up closure that allows for a secure and comfortable fit. Its lightweight design complements an active lifestyle, whether for running or casual errands. The Saucony Women's Cohesion 16 also emphasizes comfort with a secure fit, enhanced by its light and breathable upper. For those who value style alongside functionality, both shoes are designed to be appealing; however, the Cohesion 16 comes in a unique Mist/Indigo colorway, which might attract buyers looking for a distinct appearance.

Breathability

Breathability is a key factor in running shoes, especially during intense workouts. The New Balance 520 V9 features a breathable mesh upper that helps keep feet cool. This is an important aspect for runners who often find their feet overheating during exercise. Similarly, the Saucony Cohesion 16 also has a light and breathable mesh upper, designed to ensure that every step feels fresh and cool. Both shoes excel in this category, but the emphasis on cooling in the New Balance design may give it an edge for longer runs in warmer conditions.

Brand Reputation

Brand reputation can play a significant role in purchasing decisions. New Balance is known for its commitment to comfort and performance, reflected in its bestseller rank of 3,173, which indicates a solid demand. Meanwhile, Saucony, while slightly lower in the bestseller rankings at 22,129, has a strong following, especially among casual runners. Both brands have their loyal customer bases, but New Balance’s higher sales rank suggests a more established market presence in the running shoe segment.

Customer Feedback

Customer feedback can provide insight into the performance of each shoe. Users of the New Balance Women's Fresh Foam 520 V9 often praise its comfort and lightweight feel, making it suitable for longer runs and daily wear. The breathable mesh is frequently highlighted as a significant advantage. Conversely, reviews for the Saucony Women's Cohesion 16 focus on its cushioning and durability, with many users appreciating the smooth transition from heel to toe. While both shoes have garnered positive feedback, the New Balance's emphasis on lightweight comfort seems to resonate more with those who prioritize speed and agility.

Which should you buy?

Choosing between the New Balance Women's Fresh Foam 520 V9 Running Shoe and the Saucony Women's Cohesion 16 Sneaker ultimately depends on your specific needs and preferences. If you are seeking a lightweight shoe with exceptional breathability and responsiveness, the New Balance option may be the better choice, despite its slightly higher price of $59.99. Conversely, if you are looking for a more cost-effective option with solid cushioning and durability, the Saucony shoe at $54.63 offers great value. Both shoes are reputable in their own right, but your decision should hinge on whether you value lighter weight or cost savings more in your running experience.