Which sports can help you lose the most weight?

A friend asked me this in a car park after a netball session, phone out, ready to switch sports if the numbers said so. So I went and looked the numbers up properly rather than guessing, and the answer turned out to be less useful than the question deserves.

The comparison, with real numbers

Energy cost is measured in METs, or metabolic equivalents, where one MET is roughly what your body uses sitting still. The values below come from the 2024 Adult Compendium of Physical Activities, the reference list researchers use. The calorie column assumes a 70 kg adult and an hour of actual activity, so treat it as an order of magnitude rather than a promise: your own figure shifts with body weight, fitness and how hard you are genuinely working.

Two things jump out of that table. The first is that the same sport swings enormously depending on how you play it: volleyball ranges from 3.0 to 8.0 METs, which is the difference between a stroll and a hard session. The second is that a Sunday kickabout version of any of these is not the number in the headline.

Why the winner of that table is not the answer

Exercise on its own is a weaker weight loss tool than the arithmetic suggests. Trials of exercise-only programmes consistently report mean losses of about two to three kilograms, well below what the energy expenditure predicts, and the explanation is compensation. Some people eat more, because hard training raises hunger and changes what feels earned. Others move less for the rest of the day without noticing, a drop in what researchers call non-exercise activity thermogenesis. Sleep and sedentary time shift too.

None of that is an argument against exercising. It is an argument against choosing a sport purely on its MET value and then feeling cheated eight weeks later. The original version of this article said you cannot outrun a bad diet, and that line has held up better than most of what surrounded it.

How the four actually behave in real life

Running: highest burn, highest dropout

Nothing on the list beats running for energy cost per hour, and nothing needs less equipment. The trade-off is impact and injury risk, particularly if you go from nothing to four sessions a week. Build up gradually, and be sceptical of any shortcut sold as the fix for that. I looked into one of the most persistent of those in a piece on whether barefoot running is really safer, and the honest answer is that the evidence does not support the promise.

Swimming: brilliant if you can already swim well

Vigorous freestyle sits close to running at 9.8 METs, and it takes the load off your joints entirely, which makes it the obvious choice if your knees or hips object to impact. The catch is technique. Recreational lengths drop to 5.8 METs, and most people swimming casually are nearer the bottom of that range than the top. A few lessons buy more calories than an extra session does.

Tennis: the sociable one that quietly works

Singles tennis at 8.0 METs is genuinely demanding, and the stop-start pattern means you work harder than the effort feels. Doubles drops to 6.0, which is still a decent hour. The real advantage is that it is booked, with another person waiting, and a commitment with someone else attached to it survives a rainy Tuesday far better than a solo plan does.

Volleyball: it depends entirely on the sand

This is where the original article oversold things. Indoor competitive volleyball is 6.0 METs, a decent session. A casual six-a-side knockabout is 3.0, roughly the same as a brisk walk. Beach volleyball in sand reaches 8.0, because sand punishes every step. If burn is your metric, the surface matters more than the sport.

The two rules worth following instead

1. Hit the NHS minimum first. That is 150 minutes of moderate activity or 75 minutes of vigorous activity a week, plus muscle-strengthening work on two days. Strength work is the part everyone skips, and it is the part that protects muscle while you are losing weight.
2. Pick the one you will still be doing in March. A 6.0 MET sport you play weekly beats a 12.0 MET sport you abandon in a fortnight, by a margin no table can show you.

Questions that come up

Is it better to do one long session or several short ones?

For weight, total weekly volume is what counts, so split it however fits your week. Shorter, more frequent sessions tend to survive contact with real life better.

Should I add weights if I want to lose fat?

Yes. Resistance training helps preserve lean mass during a deficit, which is why the guidelines put it in alongside cardio rather than as an optional extra.

Why has my weight stalled even though I train hard?

Compensation is the usual culprit: a little more food, a little less movement outside training. Tracking intake honestly for a week is more informative than switching sport.

Updated 12 August 2026. General information, not medical advice. If you are new to exercise, pregnant, or managing a heart, joint or metabolic condition, check with your GP before starting something intense.

Sources: 2024 Adult Compendium of Physical Activities, third update of the energy costs of human activities, and pacompendium.com; NHS physical activity guidelines for adults aged 19 to 64; research literature on resistance to exercise-induced weight loss and compensatory behavioural adaptations.