This ranking leads with the lowest weight per pair, full stop. It still gates on a usable max length, so a pole that is light only because it is short does not take the top spot on grams alone.
Trekking Poles | Gear Matrix
| Product | GearScore (Ultralight) | Material | Weight | Packed | Max length | Price | Fold | Buy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 93 | Carbon | 8.7 oz | 36 cm | 120 cm | $170 | Fixed | ||
| 81 | Carbon | 9.8 oz | 60 cm | 130 cm | $195 | Telescoping | ||
| 76 | Carbon | 12.0 oz | 40 cm | 125 cm | $240 | Folding | ||
4 | 74 | Carbon | 12.4 oz | 38 cm | 130 cm | $245 | Folding | |
5 | 66 | Carbon | 12.9 oz | 58 cm | 120 cm | $189 | Telescoping | |
6 | 56 | Carbon | 16.0 oz | 40 cm | 130 cm | $250 | Folding | |
7 | 54 | Carbon | 16.6 oz | 37 cm | 120 cm | $190 | Folding | |
8 | 50 | Carbon | 17.2 oz | 40 cm | 120 cm | $230 | Folding | |
9 | 46 | Carbon | 16.0 oz | 76 cm | 132 cm | $65 | Telescoping | |
10 | 45 | Carbon | 17.1 oz | 61 cm | 130 cm | $230 | Telescoping | |
11 | 43 | Aluminum | 17.3 oz | 63 cm | 140 cm | $170 | Telescoping | |
12 | 41 | Aluminum | 19.1 oz | 37 cm | 120 cm | $56 | Folding | |
13 | 41 | Aluminum | 17.6 oz | 66 cm | 125 cm | $160 | Telescoping | |
14 | 39 | Aluminum | 18.0 oz | 66 cm | 135 cm | $110 | Telescoping | |
15 | 37 | Aluminum | 18.0 oz | 74 cm | 140 cm | $120 | Telescoping | |
16 | 35 | Aluminum | 19.0 oz | 62 cm | 140 cm | $120 | Telescoping | |
17 | 34 | Aluminum | 19.2 oz | 64 cm | 140 cm | $119 | Telescoping | |
18 | 29 | Aluminum | 20.8 oz | 53 cm | 137 cm | $30 | Telescoping |
The Buy column links to retailers we may earn a commission from, at no extra cost to you. It never affects rankings.
Scatter plot
Plot any spec against any other to see the tradeoffs. Point color is the GearScore; size and shape are yours to assign. Hover any point for the details.
The full picture
Ultralight is about the fewest grams in your hands that still do the job, so this list rewards the poles that deliver a usable length for the lowest weight. Weight per pair is the headline, and this is where carbon and fixed-length designs pull ahead: 230 to 350 grams a pair, light enough that you forget you are carrying them, in a pole that still sets tall enough to hike and pitch a shelter.
The lightest number does not automatically win. A short travel pole that saves grams by not extending to a real hiking height cannot serve most hikers, so max length still gates the score and the top picks pair a very low weight with a usable reach. Packed length and price stay in view so the ranking does not chase grams off a cliff. Every spec is the manufacturer figure, and an unpublished one shows "n/s" and is never scored as a zero.
Two things to know when you go this light. The lightest poles are often fixed-length or thin carbon, which trades adjustability and some durability for weight, so they reward a careful hiker over someone who leans hard on rock. And a featherweight pole flexes more, which many hikers never notice but a heavy leaner will. If you want the lightest pole that still adjusts and takes abuse, the backpacking preset balances that; if pure grams is all that matters, this is your list.
Common questions
What are the lightest trekking poles?
The lightest usable trekking poles weigh roughly 230 to 300 grams a pair, almost always carbon and often fixed-length or minimalist folding designs. Below that you reach ultra-minimal poles that give up adjustability or a usable height. This page ranks by weight while gating on max length, so the featherweights on top are the ones that still fit a real hiker.
Do ultralight poles break more easily?
They can flex more and, in carbon, splinter if they bind in rock or take a hard sideways load, because thin carbon trades some toughness for weight. For a careful hiker on trail they last for years; if you routinely lean hard on rock or travel rough talus, a slightly heavier aluminum or thicker carbon pole is more forgiving. Durability is a tradeoff the weight ranking does not score directly.
Are fixed-length poles worth it to save weight?
For dedicated fast-and-light hikers and runners, yes: fixed poles are the lightest and stiffest because they drop the locks and overlap of adjustable models. The catch is you must buy them to your height and cannot lengthen for descents or adjust to pitch a shelter. This ranking gates on max length so fixed poles compete only when they are long enough to fit you.
How are ultralight poles ranked?
The list leads with the lowest weight per pair, keeps packed length and price in view, and gates on max length so a too-short pole cannot win on grams alone. Every spec is published and sourced, unpublished ones show "n/s" and are never scored as zero, and you can re-weight any factor.
Bang for Your Buck
Dollars per point of GearScore. The lower the number, the more quality you get for your money. Each bar carries both metrics at once: a solid bar for the highlighted one over a faded ghost of the other. Sorted to the best value first, and always scored by the algorithm you've set above.
GearScore Algorithm
A GearScore ranks products on objective, published specs only, never opinions. It starts on a pre-tuned default; make it yours below, or pick a "Best for" preset up top.
Customize your algorithm
Answer a few quick questions, or grab the sliders yourself. Nothing changes the ranking until you apply it. Then everything re-sorts.