There was a time when it was tough to get a spot on the treadmill or elliptical at the local gym. Cardio was billed as the ultimate fat burner, and facilities invested accordingly. Fast forward to today, and it’s the weight room that’s always packed, as strength training dominates both member attention and facility investments. Marketing budgets followed the trend. So did equipment purchases. Cardio machines haven’t disappeared, but their use case within the fitness industry has undeniably shifted.
The narrative, then, is clear: strength training is in, traditional cardio is out.
Or, is it possible that’s too simple an explanation?
Dr. Benjamin Levine, a leading exercise physiologist and researcher at UT Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas who specializes in cardiovascular performance, doesn’t believe cardio is going anywhere, pointing to the constant ebb and flow of trends across the fitness industry. He also doesn’t think the momentary decline in cardio’s popularity (if there is any) reflects a decline in its importance.
“I get all kinds of questions about all kinds of workouts. I get questions about endurance training, HIIT training, moderate intensity, long-distance training, marathons. ‘Should I not do marathons?’ ‘Should I include strength?’ ‘Should I not include strength?’ They’re asking about all of it,” says Levine. “I would not say there’s a clear pattern that reflects anything more than the degrees of who’s paying attention to what. I wouldn’t overinterpret such trends.”
The real story, then, isn’t that cardio is dying, but rather that cardio is evolving from the traditional equipment-centric model, and becoming embedded in new formats, technologies and modalities that align with a person’s unique needs and preferences.
Change in perception, not science
From a physiological standpoint, the research supporting cardiovascular fitness remains bulletproof. Dr. Cayla McAvoy, an exercise physiologist and lead author of the American College of Sports Medicine’s 2026 ACSM Worldwide Fitness Trends report, is clear on this point.
“From a science perspective, nothing has changed about cardiorespiratory fitness,” she says. “It remains one of the strongest predictors of long-term health and longevity.”
What might be changing is how this research translates into the way facilities think about programming and how they position cardio to their members.
“The gap is not necessarily a sign that people have stopped doing aerobic work,” McAvoy says, “but more likely a shift in format and delivery. For example, High-Intensity Interval Training held top-five positions for many years in the ACSM trends report. While HIIT is still on the list for 2026, it dropped to 12th. We also see cardio showing up in different places, categories like Adult Recreation and Sport Clubs debuted this year, Exercise for Weight Management landed at number three, and Group Fitness Classes returned to the top 20 with many formats still rooted in aerobic training.”
This distinction is crucial for facility operators. Cardio isn’t disappearing. It’s shape-shifting. When a member takes a spinning class, attends a rowing club, joins a recreational soccer league or follows an app-guided interval workout, they’re doing cardio. They’re just not thinking of it as “cardio,” and they’re not doing it on a treadmill.
Modern cardio manifest
McAvoy identifies three emerging characteristics of how people are engaging with aerobic training in 2026, noting that it’s tech-enabled, outdoor and social.
The technology piece is particularly important. Wearable technology ranked as the number one fitness trend in ACSM’s 2026 report, and its integration with cardio training is reshaping how people approach aerobic work. “For many people, wearables increase engagement because they can see real-time heart rate zones, recovery metrics and progress over time,” McAvoy says. “It makes cardio feel more purposeful, since they can match effort with a clear goal instead of guessing. Overall, wearables seem to personalize cardio rather than replace it.”
Mobile exercise apps and data-driven technology also cracked the top 10 in the trends report, suggesting that personalized, metrics-based cardio programming is increasingly what attracts members, and not lengthy sessions on a stationary bike.
Beyond technology, McAvoy points to Outdoor Fitness Activities (ranked 18th) and Adult Recreation and Sport Clubs (ranked 9th) as signs that facilities need to reimagine where and how cardio happens. “Several 2026 trends point to how people are getting their heart rate up in different ways,” she says. “HIIT can be done with minimal equipment in small spaces; outdoor fitness activities keep cardio on trails, parks and even out on the water; and adult recreation clubs bring it onto pickleball courts, running paths and rec-league fields.”
The implications for facility managers are significant. Square footage dedicated to long rows of cardio equipment may be better allocated to flexible spaces for interval training, small-group formats and recreation-driven programming.
Prescription for longevity
Despite the shifting landscape, Levine echoes McAvoy, noting that the fundamentals of cardiovascular health haven’t changed, and they remain non-negotiable.
“There’s no magic picture on training, and no good athlete does only one thing,” Levine says.
His own prescription, based on decades of research, treats exercise as a foundational component of personal health, not a luxury add-on. “Exercise has to be incorporated into your daily life, just like you have three meals, you try to go to sleep at night, you change your clothing, you take a shower, you brush your teeth. These are things that keep your body robust, healthy, strong, fit and able to do the things that you want to accomplish.”
For facility operators and coaches looking for guidance, Levine’s framework is practical and implementable. He recommends a total of four to five days per week of physical activity that incorporates:
One day of prolonged, fun activity: At least an hour of something enjoyable — tennis, cycling, or any activity that sustains effort for extended periods and doesn’t feel like work.
One day of higher-intensity work: Such as the Norwegian 4x4 protocol (four minutes at maximum effort, followed by three minutes of recovery, repeated four times), or any approach that safely elevates intensity.
Two to three days of moderate-intensity training: Using the “talk test” as a guide — slightly breathless but able to maintain conversation — for at least 30 minutes.
One to two days of strength and balance work: Anything from weights to yoga to Pilates.
“The distribution of a variety of different kinds of exercise stimuli would keep you fresh, prevent you from being injured, and maximize your overall health,” Levine says, noting that the choice between cardio and strength is a false one, and the research is clear that both matter, with a combination of the two producing better outcomes than either one alone.
Tailored solutions
One question continues to challenge the fitness industry: who isn’t getting enough cardio, and why? McAvoy’s data suggests generational differences in how people approach aerobic training.
“Younger fitness professionals under 35 tended to rank tech-enabled trends like wearable technology and mobile exercise apps in their top three, which often include cardio through zone training,” she notes. “Professionals aged 55 and older consistently ranked fitness programs for older adults in their top three, a category that includes low-impact aerobic work to support balance, mobility and health.”
The takeaway: cardio is happening across age groups, just in different formats. Younger members engage through technology and performance metrics while older members benefit from low-impact, functional approaches that support quality of life.
Perhaps the most practical insight from McAvoy for facility decision-makers is how to communicate the importance of cardio in an environment where strength training currently dominates the conversation.
“I would speak to how cardio supports the goals they already care about,” she says. “Data-driven technology highlights how metrics such as HRV [heart rate variability], recovery status and aerobic capacity affect strength output and training readiness. Exercise for mental health reinforces that low-intensity aerobic work can improve stress resilience and recovery between sessions. Instead of presenting cardio as something separate, facilities can frame it as better work capacity, better recovery, better training readiness and a better overall training experience.”
This could be the real opportunity for facilities in 2026. Cardio isn’t dead. Its value proposition has changed. Members don’t want to hear about “steady-state cardio.” They want to hear about performance optimization, recovery support, mental health benefits, training efficiency and complementary training effectiveness when coupled with resistance work. They want technology that tracks progress. They want flexibility in where, when and how they engage in their aerobic work.
Facilities that recognize this shift — and adapt their equipment investments, programming and messaging accordingly — will be better positioned to serve both the health and performance needs of their members and athletes. Cardio isn’t going anywhere, it just looks different than it used to.
The potential of BFR
For years, Dr. Benjamin Levine, exercise physiologist and researcher at UT Southwestern Medical Center, was skeptical of blood flow restriction (BFR) training, a technique that uses external compression (wraps or cuffs) to partially restrict blood flow during exercise, allowing participants to achieve muscle-building results at lower intensities.
He’s changed his mind.
“I was really against it for a long period of time,” Levine admits. “But I do think that in people who have been injured and are trying to preserve their strength and fitness, there may be particular value in looking for ways to minimize the intensity or strength of the whole contraction, but still preserve muscle mass and function.”
Levine notes recent research by kinesiologist Stuart Phillips that shows low-intensity, higher-repetition exercise to the point of fatigue can generate the same amount of muscle protein synthesis as traditional heavy lifting, making BFR particularly valuable for older adults, injured athletes or post-surgical populations who need to maintain strength without high joint stress.
For facilities, BFR could represent an emerging tool in the cardio-strength continuum, bridging the gap between low-impact training and performance goals, offering an alternative pathway to fitness for populations that might otherwise be excluded from traditional programming.
