hot list
Golf Digest Hot List 2025: Inside the process behind our annual equipment review
J.D. Cuban
Just as there was with the first Hot List 22 years ago, there’s a kind of pursuit of the impossible that drives our equipment testing. While “What are the best new clubs?” seems a straightforward enough enterprise, each possible answer spurs more questions. “Best” is a word that draws a lot of attention, but we here at Hot List Central present our annual collection of drivers, woods, irons, wedges and putters in terms of what fits your game and swing. These are the clubs that should move to the top of your own shopping list.
While the intent of our testing hasn’t changed in two decades, the process for getting this year’s Hot List and its 143 winners in front of you is almost unrecognizable. What once took a handful of days now includes three weeks of testing at the Reunion Resort in Orlando; study by a team of scientists, editors and player-testers representing golfers like you; plus, months of independent research. We’re doing more work defining clubs by the type of players that match best with their characteristics. We’re taking the input of each of our testers and making their assessments available in a broader form than ever before. With the full gamut of comments from each of our player tester now accessible online, there will be more opportunities to align yourself with select players and let their individual reviews further inform your decisions on equipment.
The goal for the program this year is as simple as that original question. What the 2025 Hot List will show you is that there is no such thing as “the best clubs.” Rather, our evolving mission is to reveal “the best clubs for you.” —Mike Stachura
Founded in research from our scientists and extensive testing by players like you
The Hot List is a massive effort by the Golf Digest editorial team, but the voting is fueled by contributions from two groups that aren’t getting paid. Our team of scientists advises us on which technologies show the most promise, and our panel of 32 player-testers lets us know which clubs are working and how. Together, they make up the foundation for our three criteria: Performance, Innovation, Look/Sound/Feel.
PERFORMANCE
J.D. Cuban
50 percent
Based on interviews with our testers, we assess the utility of each club. In other words, this is a grade of what happens to the ball when a player hits it. Rapsodo MLM2Pro launch monitors are used at every hitting station, and during testing this time we recorded nearly 27,000 shots. Fitters work with players on-site so that they are evaluating clubs that are ideal for their individual specs. (For example, a tester most likely will hit only the driver model within a driver family that fits his or her game.) Also, our low-handicap players don’t evaluate super-game-improvement irons, just as our high-handicap players don’t hit players irons. All of the drivers are tested for conformance to the rules on spring-like effect before player evaluations begin.
INNOVATION
J.D. Cuban
30 percent
In consultation with our scientists and based on our interviews with company R&D teams and our review of company technical documents, this grade reflects how a particular technology advances the category. We also consider how that technology is explained and how much of a commitment to fitting a company has made. In short, the best clubs in Innovation are changing what’s possible.
LOOK • SOUND • FEEL
J.D. Cuban
20 percent
Using input from our testers, we rate the relative excellence of the visual, auditory and tactile experience of hitting a particular club. The more the club resonates with our understanding of what a golf club should be, the higher the grade it receives. In short, this is a measure of what the player discovers while testing each club.
