TriPaced vs Runna
Compared criteria
| Criterion | TriPaced | Runna |
|---|---|---|
| Disciplines covered | 3 disciplines: swim, bike, run (70.3 + IM, official distances) | 1 discipline: running only (5K → marathon, ultra) [source] |
| Triathlon distance supported | Half Ironman 70.3 (1.9-90-21.1) + Full Ironman 140.6 (3.8-180-42.2) | None (Runna does not support triathlon) [source] |
| Race-day pacing by segment | Yes : J-7 execution plan per discipline with IF target/ceiling + segments + nutrition g/h | Yes on the marathon (per-km pacing + race strategy) [source] |
| Weekly RPE/load adaptation | Yes : automatic weekly recompute based on RPE entries + real Strava load | Yes via Strava Premium and Runna post-acquisition algorithm [source] |
| Watch sync (Garmin, Wahoo, COROS, Polar) | Yes via Intervals.icu (official training calendar) | Yes (Apple Watch, Garmin) : native Runna [source] |
| Explicit physiological guardrails | Yes : taper IM ≥ 21d / 70.3 ≥ 10d, TSB out-of-taper [-30, +15], long run ≤ 25 % weekly volume, strict 80/20 polarized | Not publicly documented (algorithm not user-explainable) [source] |
| Pricing | Free | Paid subscription (14-day trial, then ~£74.99/year as advertised on their site) [source] |
Public sources cited
Try it yourself
The most honest way to compare two tools is to test them.