PPL or upper/lower: which is better?
No study has directly compared push pull legs with an upper/lower split so far. The available comparisons show no advantage for any particular split type at equal volume. What decides is how many training days realistically fit into your week.
The two splits at a glance
The upper/lower split divides training into upper and lower body and is typically trained 4 days a week, so each muscle group is worked twice a week. The push pull legs split divides by movement pattern into push, pull and legs and is trained on 3 or 6 days.
What research shows about split types
Direct comparisons between PPL and upper/lower are missing. There are, however, studies on related questions. The meta-analysis by Ramos-Campo et al. (2024), with 14 studies and 392 participants, compared split and full-body training. At equal volume, there was no significant difference in either strength or muscle growth. The authors write that lifters can choose their routine based on personal preference.
Pedersen et al. (2022) compared a 4-day upper/lower split with 2-day full-body training in untrained women, using identical exercises and set numbers. The split brought no advantage in strength or muscle mass. And Gonçalves Dias et al. (2026) found no difference whether push and pull exercises were mixed or grouped by movement pattern, as PPL does.
Practice decides
| Training days per week | Fitting split |
|---|---|
| 3 days | PPL (1× per muscle) or full body |
| 4 days | Upper/lower (2× per muscle) |
| 6 days | PPL (2× per muscle) |
Beyond the number of days, practical points matter. Upper/lower sessions are usually longer because the whole upper body is trained on one day. PPL spreads the work over more, but shorter, sessions. If you miss a day, the whole PPL rhythm shifts quickly; upper/lower with rest days in between absorbs that more easily.
Log your workout with GymLog AI in 5 seconds
GymLog AI tracks any split, PPL or upper/lower, and shows your volume per muscle group automatically.
Download on the App StoreGet it on Google PlaySources
- Ramos-Campo, D. J., Benito-Peinado, P. J., Andreu-Caravaca, L., et al. (2024). Efficacy of Split Versus Full-Body Resistance Training on Strength and Muscle Growth: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 38(7), 1330–1340. PubMed
- Pedersen, H., Fimland, M. S., Schoenfeld, B. J., et al. (2022). A randomized trial on the efficacy of split-body versus full-body resistance training in non-resistance trained women. BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation, 14(1), 87. PubMed
- Gonçalves Dias, W., Benvenutti Bueno de Camargo, J., et al. (2026). A Comparison Between Synergist and Nonsynergist Resistance Training Schemes in Recreationally Trained Men. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 40(4), 377–385. PubMed
- Schoenfeld, B. J., Grgic, J. & Krieger, J. (2019). How many times per week should a muscle be trained to maximize muscle hypertrophy? A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies examining the effects of resistance training frequency. Journal of Sports Sciences, 37(11), 1286–1295. PubMed
- Currier, B. S., et al. (American College of Sports Medicine) (2026). Resistance Training Prescription for Muscle Function, Hypertrophy, and Physical Performance in Healthy Adults: An Overview of Reviews. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 58(4), 851–872. PubMed