Kettlebell training

What it is

A weight with a handle

A kettlebell is a round weight of steel or cast iron, often likened to a cannonball with a handle¹. A 2019 scoping review separates kettlebell training from ordinary lifts done with a bell, such as rows and squats¹. In those lifts, the review argues, the bell serves as a plain handled load, and nothing about the exercise belongs to kettlebells alone¹. A 2024 review describes kettlebell exercises as swinging or ballistic movements, with quick speeding up and slowing down⁶. The same review says these movements need the trunk muscles to hold steady at the same time⁶.

The styles

Sport, hardstyle and juggling are among the few styles the 2019 review found widely recognised, along with some CrossFit techniques¹. Kettlebell sport, or Girevoy sport, uses standard steel competition bells, commonly made from 8 to 32 kg, for timed jerks and snatches¹. The review quotes one author summing up kettlebell sport as one long set of many repetitions¹. It quotes another describing hardstyle as bursts of high-powered work at or above maximal effort, with set work and rest periods¹. Hardstyle rests on six basic techniques: the swing, the clean, the press, the squat, the snatch and the Turkish get-up¹.

The swing

The “Russian” swing bends mainly at the hips, like a deadlift, and raises the bell to chest height¹. The two-handed “American” swing goes overhead, is linked with a squatting motion, and is most linked with CrossFit¹.

Who has been studied

About half of kettlebell research publications studied hardstyle training, and the two-handed swing was the exercise studied most often¹. In the 2019 review, 79% of experiments and trials used healthy college-age people¹. In more than 80%, the people were novices who had not trained with kettlebells before¹.

What it loads

The muscles of the back and hips

In 7 men swinging a 16-kg bell, the swing produced rapid on-off cycles of muscle activity². These reached about 50% of a maximum voluntary contraction, the hardest effort a person can make, in the low-back muscles². In the gluteal muscles of the buttock, they reached about 80%². In 14 resistance-trained people, the one-arm swing, snatch and clean each placed different demands on the erector spinae, the long muscles beside the spine⁷. The swing drew more erector spinae activity than the snatch⁷.

The 2019 review adds a caution about surface electromyography (EMG), which measures a muscle’s activity from its electrical signals¹. EMG size alone does not support conclusions about muscle force or long-term training effects¹.

The trunk and hamstrings

Several studies compared muscles on each side of the trunk, or within one muscle group^8,9:

What was compared	What the study found
One-arm against two-arm swing, 16 men with a 16-kg bell	One-arm swings raised activity in the opposite upper erector spinae and the same-side rectus abdominis (a flat front-of-belly muscle); the other sides fell8
One-arm swing, snatch and clean, 14 trained people	Demands differed on the opposite external oblique (outermost flat belly muscle) and the vastus lateralis (outer thigh muscle)7
Swing with a forceful finish, from a systematic review of core-muscle EMG (three free-weight studies of this muscle)	About 81% of maximum in the internal oblique (the middle flat muscle of the abdomen), the highest free-weight value found10
Inner and outer hamstrings, 2025 meta-analysis (a study pooling earlier studies)	EMG in the semitendinosus (inner hamstring) was greater than in the biceps femoris (outer hamstring) during swings9

The 2025 meta-analysis also concluded that differences in study methods make it hard to say whether any exercise favours either hamstring muscle⁹.

The shoulder in an overhead press

In 28 male college baseball players pressing 11.34 kg overhead, a bell held upside down was compared with other grips¹¹. It drew more activity in the serratus anterior, a muscle on the side of the chest, than a dumbbell or a normally held bell¹¹. The dumbbell drew more activity from the middle deltoid, which lifts the arm out to the side, and the lower trapezius¹¹.

Forces on the body and spine

Among male amateur lifters, the swing’s peak ground reaction force (the push of the ground back up) was about twice their body weight¹. In 16 men, force tended to be higher in back squats and jump squats than in swings, but swings produced more power than back squats¹².

In 30 active college-age adults, bells of 10%, 15% and 20% of body mass were compared in hip-hinge swings¹³. Heavier bells raised the joint moments (turning effects) at the lower back, hip and ankle, mainly through higher ground reaction force¹³.

In the 7-man study, low-back compression was about 3,200 N during swings². The swing also produced a backward shear force, a sliding force, of the fourth lumbar vertebra on the fifth². That direction is the opposite of a traditional lift². The barbell deadlift, by contrast, produces a forward shear at L4/L5, the joint between the fourth and fifth lower-back bones¹. In 2019, whether the swing’s backward shear holds true across people was not yet known¹.

The heart and lungs

Studies measured the swing and snatch against maximum heart rate and oxygen use^14,15:

Study	Oxygen use	Heart rate
10 college-age men, 12 minutes of two-handed swings with 16 kg	Average 65% of maximum14	Average 87% of maximum14
10 men, nonstop snatches in sport conditions	Peak about 83% of the maximum measured on a rowing machine15	Peak about 98% of maximum15

In 13 young adults, 10 minutes of swings and of treadmill running were matched for how hard they felt¹⁶. Heart rates were similar, but oxygen use and energy spent were 25 to 39% higher for running¹⁶. The 2019 review found several studies with a lower peak oxygen use in kettlebell work than in other exercise matched on other factors¹. It judged this consistent with hardstyle not being the most effective exercise for heart and lung capacity¹.

How the body adapts

What the 2019 review concluded

The 2019 scoping review found that effect sizes, a standard measure of how large a difference is, were mostly trivial to small¹. Its longitudinal studies were few, mostly too small, and of low quality¹. It judged the data too thin to strongly support claims of better performance or fitness¹. The review read this as a lack of data, not as evidence that the training does nothing¹.

The review read this as a lack of data, not as evidence that the training does nothing.

The review suggested that low confidence in the effects, and weak support for them, is likely due to largely under-dosed study participants¹. It also suggested that kettlebell weight is likely well below the intensity needed to make muscles grow¹. It found no sign that one style, sport or hardstyle, is better than another¹. On the heart and lungs, it said the training appears to give enough of a response to raise fitness if the dose suits the person¹. It added that these effects have often been over-reported and still need a high-quality randomised trial¹.

Strength, power and jumping

Small trials measured changes after kettlebell training, some against other training or no training^17,18,19:

Who was studied	What was found
21 healthy men aged 18 to 27, randomly assigned to 6 weeks of swings or jump squats, twice a week	Half-squat strength rose 9.8% and vertical jump 19.8%, with no significant difference between the two kinds of training17
30 healthy men, 6 weeks of weightlifting or kettlebell training	Both groups gained strength and power, but the weightlifting group gained more back-squat strength18
37 adults aged 18 to 72, 10 weeks of group training	Bench press improved against a control group; vertical jump did not change19
28 men and 25 women, 12 weeks of swings	Deadlift 1RM rose in both men and women; men gained significantly more power20
38 volleyball and basketball club athletes, 6 weeks, against plyometric jump training	The kettlebell group improved on each of the three jump tests, and the plyometric group showed no significant change21

In the athletes’ trial, only the change in squat jump differed significantly between groups overall²¹. The 2019 review judged the weightlifting comparison unreliable¹. The weightlifting group trained at 80% of their 1RM (the heaviest load a person can lift once), against a 16-kg bell¹. That group had also trained for two-thirds of the tests¹.

Balance and pain in workers

Two reports of randomised trials (which assign people to groups by chance) each studied 40 adults from jobs with high rates of musculoskeletal pain^22,23. In one, the group that did 8 weeks of kettlebell training was compared with a control group²². Their neck and shoulder pain fell 2.1 points more than in the control group, and low-back pain 1.4 points more²². With ballistic training three times a week, trunk extensor strength rose²². Trunk flexor and shoulder strength did not rise compared with the control group, and aerobic fitness did not change²².

The 2019 review notes that widely cited pain drops after kettlebell training had only a small effect size¹. Within groups, they fell short of the 2-point minimal clinically important difference, the smallest change big enough to matter to patients¹. People also did not need to have pain to join the study they came from¹. In the other, 8 weeks of swings three times a week cut stopping time after a sudden jolt to balance by 109 ms against control²³. Jump height rose 1.5 cm, but not significantly more than in the control group²³.

Older adults, fitness and body fat

In the BELL trial, 32 insufficiently active adults aged 59 to 79 did 3 months of progressive hardstyle training³. Compared with 3 months of usual activity, their grip strength, 6-minute walk distance, 1RM strength and lean mass in the arms and legs rose³. A randomised trial studied 33 women aged 65 to 75 with sarcopenia, or age-related muscle loss⁴. Eight weeks of kettlebell training twice a week raised their muscle mass in the arms and legs⁴. Grip and back strength rose too, and gains were still there after 4 weeks without training⁴.

In 17 female NCAA Division I soccer players, 4 weeks of snatch intervals raised VO2max, the most oxygen the body can use, by about 6%²⁴. A circuit weight-training group showed no significant change²⁴. In 60 sedentary obese male college students, 12 weeks of kettlebell or bodyweight training both cut body fat and raised VO2max compared with no training²⁵.

What studies found about injury

The 2019 review found no adverse events reported in kettlebell trials, and no clear, measurable risk of harm¹. It noted that this could reflect the training or limited reporting¹. In the BELL trial of adults aged 59 to 79, there were four non-serious adverse events, or 3.07 per 1,000 hours³. In that trial, 71% of people reported muscle soreness at least once³. Anecdotal reports of delayed soreness, and of bruising where the bell strikes the forearm, are not unusual among novices¹.

By 2019, three case reports had linked injury to kettlebell training¹:

• de Quervain’s tenosynovitis, irritation of the tendons at the thumb side of the wrist, from repeated knocks to a thumb tendon¹;
• exertional rhabdomyolysis, a rapid breakdown of muscle tissue brought on by exercise¹;
• a stress fracture, a small crack from repeated loading, in the radius, the forearm bone on the thumb side¹.

Each appears to describe a mistake in training load¹. In 15,348 emergency-department cases linked to resistance training, kettlebells were involved in 0.80% of injuries in women and 0.10% in men⁵.

Connections

Several studies on this page measured muscle activity during the swing, snatch, clean and press^2,7,8,11. The 2019 review sets apart rows and squats using a bell as a plain weight, lifting covered under free weights and machines and resistance training¹. Two trials compared kettlebell training with jump training, the subject of plyometric training^17,21.

Muscle entries with kettlebell findings on this page are the erector spinae, hamstrings, internal oblique, rectus abdominis and serratus anterior^7,8,9,10,11.

Sources

1. Meigh NJ, Keogh JWL, Schram B, Hing WA (2019). Kettlebell training in clinical practice: a scoping review.. BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation. doi:10.1186/s13102-019-0130-z PMID 31497302
2. McGill SM, Marshall LW (2012). Kettlebell swing, snatch, and bottoms-up carry: back and hip muscle activation, motion, and low back loads.. Journal of strength and conditioning research. doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e31823a4063 PMID 21997449
3. Meigh NJ, Keogh JWL, Schram B, Hing W, Rathbone EN (2022). Effects of supervised high-intensity hardstyle kettlebell training on grip strength and health-related physical fitness in insufficiently active older adults: the BELL pragmatic controlled trial.. BMC geriatrics. doi:10.1186/s12877-022-02958-z PMID 35459114
4. Chen HT, Wu HJ, Chen YJ, Ho SY, Chung YC (2018). Effects of 8-week kettlebell training on body composition, muscle strength, pulmonary function, and chronic low-grade inflammation in elderly women with sarcopenia.. Experimental gerontology. doi:10.1016/j.exger.2018.09.015 PMID 30243898
5. Coffey K, Pezzullo L, Nixon RM, Bolling J, Vincent HK (2026). A 10-Year Analysis of Resistance Training-Related Injuries Treated in Emergency Departments: Are Patterns Shifting With More Participation of Women Over Time?. Journal of strength and conditioning research. doi:10.1519/JSC.0000000000005268 PMID 41118234
6. Jaiswal PR, Ramteke SU, Shedge S (2024). Enhancing Athletic Performance: A Comprehensive Review on Kettlebell Training.. Cureus. doi:10.7759/cureus.53497 PMID 38440022
7. Lyons BC, Mayo JJ, Tucker WS, Wax B, Hendrix RC (2017). Electromyographical Comparison of Muscle Activation Patterns Across Three Commonly Performed Kettlebell Exercises.. Journal of strength and conditioning research. doi:10.1519/JSC.0000000000001771 PMID 28394829
8. Andersen V, Fimland MS, Gunnarskog A, Jungård GA, Slåttland RA, Vraalsen ØF, Saeterbakken AH (2016). Core Muscle Activation in One-Armed and Two-Armed Kettlebell Swing.. Journal of strength and conditioning research. doi:10.1519/JSC.0000000000001240 PMID 26473519
9. Sahinis C, Amiridis IG, Enoka RM, Kellis E (2025). Differences in activation amplitude between semitendinosus and biceps femoris during hamstring exercises: A systematic and critical review with meta-analysis.. Journal of sports sciences. doi:10.1080/02640414.2025.2486879 PMID 40192215
10. Oliva-Lozano JM, Muyor JM (2020). Core Muscle Activity During Physical Fitness Exercises: A Systematic Review.. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. doi:10.3390/ijerph17124306 PMID 32560185
11. Busch A, Sarver X, Comstock K (2024). Electromyographic analysis of shoulder-complex muscles performing overhead presses with dumbbell, kettlebell, and bottom-up kettlebell.. Journal of bodywork and movement therapies. doi:10.1016/j.jbmt.2023.10.001 PMID 38432822
12. Lake JP, Lauder MA (2012). Mechanical demands of kettlebell swing exercise.. Journal of strength and conditioning research. doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182474280 PMID 22207261
13. Levine NA, Hasan MB, Avalos MA, Lee S, Rigby BR, Kwon YH (2020). Effects of kettlebell mass on lower-body joint kinetics during a kettlebell swing exercise.. Sports biomechanics. doi:10.1080/14763141.2020.1726442 PMID 32131695
14. Farrar RE, Mayhew JL, Koch AJ (2010). Oxygen cost of kettlebell swings.. Journal of strength and conditioning research. doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181d15516 PMID 20300022
15. Chan M, MacInnis MJ, Koch S, MacLeod KE, Lohse KR, Gallo ME, Sheel AW, Koehle MS (2020). Cardiopulmonary Demand of 16-kg Kettlebell Snatches in Simulated Girevoy Sport.. Journal of strength and conditioning research. doi:10.1519/JSC.0000000000002588 PMID 29781941
16. Hulsey CR, Soto DT, Koch AJ, Mayhew JL (2012). Comparison of kettlebell swings and treadmill running at equivalent rating of perceived exertion values.. Journal of strength and conditioning research. doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182510629 PMID 22395274
17. Lake JP, Lauder MA (2012). Kettlebell swing training improves maximal and explosive strength.. Journal of strength and conditioning research. doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e31825c2c9b PMID 22580981
18. Otto WH 3rd, Coburn JW, Brown LE, Spiering BA (2012). Effects of weightlifting vs. kettlebell training on vertical jump, strength, and body composition.. Journal of strength and conditioning research. doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e31824f233e PMID 22344061
19. Manocchia P, Spierer DK, Lufkin AK, Minichiello J, Castro J (2013). Transference of kettlebell training to strength, power, and endurance.. Journal of strength and conditioning research. doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e31825770fe PMID 22549084
20. Santos Junior ERT, De Salles BF, Dias I, Simão R, Willardson JM (2024). Sex Differences in Neuromuscular Adaptations Following 12 Weeks of Kettlebell Swing Training.. Cureus. doi:10.7759/cureus.70551 PMID 39479133
21. Brandt T, Koch L, Herber M, Ohlendorf D, Schmidt A (2025). Kettlebell Training vs. Plyometric Training: A Comparison of Jump Performance in Volleyball and Basketball Athletes.. Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology. doi:10.3390/jfmk10040395 PMID 41133585
22. Jay K, Frisch D, Hansen K, Zebis MK, Andersen CH, Mortensen OS, Andersen LL (2011). Kettlebell training for musculoskeletal and cardiovascular health: a randomized controlled trial.. Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health. doi:10.5271/sjweh.3136 PMID 21107513
23. Jay K, Jakobsen MD, Sundstrup E, Skotte JH, Jørgensen MB, Andersen CH, Pedersen MT, Andersen LL (2013). Effects of Kettlebell Training on Postural Coordination and Jump Performance. Journal of strength and conditioning research. doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e318267a1aa PMID 22843044
24. Falatic JA, Plato PA, Holder C, Finch D, Han K, Cisar CJ (2015). Effects of Kettlebell Training on Aerobic Capacity.. Journal of strength and conditioning research. doi:10.1519/JSC.0000000000000845 PMID 26102260
25. Govindasamy K, Gogoi H, Jebabli N, Bediri SM, Aljahni M, Parpa K, Clark CCT, Granacher U, Zouhal H (2024). The effects of kettlebell training versus resistance training using the own body mass on physical fitness and physiological adaptations in obese adults: a randomized controlled trial.. BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation. doi:10.1186/s13102-024-00894-6 PMID 38715134

Every source the library cites

Changes

• October 15, 2026 Links the new kettlebell swing page; one 2024 trial now reported by direction of result only.
• September 30, 2026 First published.