September 11, 2026, 8:46 am | Read time: 5 minutes
Many people use their daily step count as a measure of how active they are. However, it may not only be about how many steps we take, but also how quickly we walk. A large study using data from the UK Biobank examined how step count and walking speed are related to mortality risk.
Fast Walking Could Reduce Risk
The key finding of the study is that even people who take only a few steps in their daily lives benefit significantly from walking faster. For those taking fewer than 5,000 steps per day, a faster walking pace was associated with a significantly reduced risk of dying during the follow-up period. Those who walk little in daily life can at least partially compensate for a lower step count by walking at a brisker pace.
This offers flexible options for different life situations: People with little time can reduce their risk by walking faster with fewer steps. On the other hand, those who prefer to walk slower—such as older adults or those concerned about falls—can achieve similar health benefits by increasing their daily step count to 5,000 to 7,500 steps.
Keeping an Eye on Both Step Count and Speed
It is already known from previous studies that taking many steps is associated with health benefits. However, the additional role of walking speed was less clear. The researchers wanted to find out how step count and step intensity together relate to the risk of dying overall or from cardiovascular disease.
To do this, they analyzed data from adults in the UK Biobank (ages 40 to 69, average age around 61 during the measurement period). Participants wore a movement sensor on their wrist for seven days between 2013 and 2015. Depending on the endpoint studied, data from exactly 64,743 people were included in the analysis of overall mortality and 70,075 people in the analysis of cardiovascular mortality. The results were published in the journal “British Journal of Sports Medicine.”1
Step Intensity Is an Important Factor
In addition to daily step count, the researchers also determined step intensity. They looked at the average number of steps per minute during the 30 most active minutes of a day—these 30 minutes did not have to be consecutive. They then examined how these values were related to deaths during a follow-up period of about eight years on average. They considered factors such as age, gender, smoking, diet, sleep, and medication use.
Overall, the combination of step count and speed proved crucial. The lowest risk of overall mortality was observed in those taking 7,500 to 10,000 steps daily with a step frequency of about 100 steps per minute. The statistically determined risk was about 43 percent lower than that of the reference group—those taking fewer than 5,000 steps daily at a very slow pace (about 45 steps per minute).
A similar pattern was seen in cardiovascular mortality. Here too, the group taking 7,500 to 10,000 steps fared particularly well. With a step frequency of about 90 steps per minute, the statistically determined risk was about 47 percent lower than that of the reference group. For more than 10,000 steps per day, no clear additional benefit of a higher walking speed was observed.
For practical purposes, this provides a simple guideline. A pace of around 90 to 100 steps per minute for about 30 minutes a day is considered a benchmark for moderate physical activity. Regardless of the total step count, this pace was associated with a significantly reduced mortality risk across all groups.
How Long You Should Walk Continuously
Can 10,000 steps a day replace exercise?
Study Context
The study’s large number of participants and the objective measurement of movement through sensors speak to its significance. Additionally, the researchers verified their results with various additional analyses, which remained largely stable. To minimize confounding effects from pre-existing conditions, the researchers excluded individuals with severe pre-existing conditions and early deaths within the first two years.
However, this is an observational study. It cannot prove that more or faster steps are actually the cause of the reduced mortality risk. For example, it is conceivable that healthier or fitter individuals naturally walk faster. Other unmeasured factors could also have influenced the results.
Moreover, walking behavior was measured only once over a seven-day period. Changes in participants’ behavior over the eight-year follow-up period could not be captured. The sample also cannot be fully generalized to the entire population, as UK Biobank participants are generally healthier and socioeconomically better off than average.
Another limitation concerns the measurement. Wrist-worn sensors can mistakenly record individual arm movements as steps or miss steps. Additionally, step counters only capture walking activities. Other healthy forms of movement, such as cycling or swimming, are not directly included in this type of analysis.
Also interesting: Is counting steps enough to shape a nice figure?
Other Studies Examined Walking Speed
A study in the journal “American Journal of Preventive Medicine” examined nearly 80,000 predominantly low-income and Black adults in the U.S. over an average of nearly 17 years. This is a group that is scarcely represented in cohorts like the UK Biobank.2 Here too, speed was crucial. Just 15 minutes of brisk walking per day was associated with about a 20 percent lower mortality risk. In contrast, slow walking for more than three hours daily resulted in only a slight and statistically insignificant risk reduction. Unlike the new study, walking speed here was based on self-reports rather than sensor data.
How many steps are beneficial was summarized in a large meta-analysis in the journal “The Lancet Public Health” in 2025.3 The researchers evaluated 57 studies from more than ten countries and found the most significant gains at about 5,000 to 7,000 steps per day. Thus, 10,000 steps remain a worthwhile goal for more active individuals, but they are not a necessity. Notably, even small increases paid off—such as moving from 2,000 to 4,000 steps daily.