Reviews you can trust.
See why.The Best Meat Cleavers
Traditional meat cleavers are built like medieval weapons. Could we find one fit for modern life?
Last Updated Feb. 8, 2023. Appears in Cook's Illustrated January/February 2004, America's Test Kitchen TV Season 19: Chinese Favorites
Our former favorite meat cleaver by Shun has been discontinued. In its place, we now recommend the Masui AUS8 Stainless Meat Cleaver 180mm.
Top Picks
See Everything We TestedWhat You Need To Know
Historically, the meat cleaver was a brutish tool. Designed to hew through bone and sinew with a single well-placed cut, the traditional meat cleaver derived its chopping power more from blunt force than from razor-sharp precision and required some strength and experience to be wielded successfully. These days, even professional butchers don’t use cleavers; for hacking through ribs and other dense bones, the three prominent Boston-area butcher shops we consulted (Savenor’s, T.F. Kinnealey & Co., and M.F. Dulock Pasture-Raised Meats) instead use handsaws or band saws, which cut more cleanly and with far less effort.
If butchers don’t need these archaic knives, do home cooks? For most people, the answer is no. That’s because there are relatively few tasks for which a cleaver is a better choice than a chef’s knife. But for those few tasks, there’s no more perfect tool. A cleaver can be considered an abuse knife—its heft and size make it ideal for jobs that might otherwise damage or wear down your chef’s knife, allowing you to chop through whole chickens, whole lobsters, or large squashes with impunity. If you make a lot of stock, for example, a cleaver is a solid investment, as it allows you to expose more of the bone and meat to the water for better flavor extraction. Once you have a cleaver, you might find it handy for other tasks, too: mincing raw meat, crushing garlic, bruising lemon grass, cracking open coconuts, and chopping cooked bone-in meat into bite-size pieces. The flat of the blade can even be used like a bench scraper to scoop up chopped items or to flatten and tenderize cutlets.
With these functions in mind, we set out to determine the best meat cleaver for home use, buying 13 cleavers priced from roughly $10.00 to roughly $180.00, including our former winner, the Global G-12 Meat Cleaver. These knives ran the gamut from heavy, ax-shaped Western-style cleavers to models that more closely resembled Chinese cleavers—lighter-weight knives with thinner, more rectangular blades—to hybrid styles that combined attributes from both. We used them to break down butternut squashes, hack up raw chicken legs and wings for stock, and chop whole roast ducks for serving. Cooks with different hand sizes, dominant hands, and levels of butchering experience took the knives for a test drive, and we also had two professional butchers examine and use them.
Medium-Weight Meat Cleavers Were Best
Preferences emerged early on in our testing. While all the knives were capable of making neat cuts through the chicken parts, a host of factors made certain models easier and more comfortable to use. The cooks and butchers agreed: The more t...
Everything We Tested
Highly Recommended
- Blade: 2.5 stars out of 3.
- Handle: 3 stars out of 3.
- Durability: 3 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 2.5 stars out of 3.
- Performance: 3 stars out of 3.
We loved this well-made, durable, ultra-keen Japanese-made meat cleaver, which effortlessly hewed through everything we put in front of it. Its grippy wood handle was comfortable for hands of all sizes to hold, even when dealing with raw, slippery chicken parts. Two tiny quibbles: Its blade is a touch shorter in height than we prefer, so it isn’t quite as easy to direct through food. And its weight falls toward the tip of the blade.
- Blade: 2.5 stars out of 3.
- Handle: 2.5 stars out of 3.
- Durability: 3 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 3 stars out of 3.
- Performance: 3 stars out of 3.
We still loved our former winner, but compared with some of the other models in this testing, its 6.25-inch blade length now seemed a bit short. Still, its well-balanced weight and very sharp, tall blade made it a pleasure to use, and it sustained relatively little wear and tear during testing. Most testers liked the steel handle, finding it comfortable and surprisingly grippy, though a few testers found it a bit too narrow and one took issue with the ergonomic bumps on its underside.
Recommended
- Blade: 3 stars out of 3.
- Handle: 2 stars out of 3.
- Durability: 1.5 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 3 stars out of 3.
- Performance: 3 stars out of 3.
This old-school cleaver was the favorite of many testers, who loved how fluidly this well-balanced, medium-weight tool moved. Its long, tall, very sharp blade made it particularly easy to maneuver through a big butternut squash and a whole duck. It had just a few minor durability issues: Its thin blade sustained a little more wear and tear than our winner’s, and its otherwise comfortable wood handle rattled on its rivets when we chopped, though it remained intact and performed well after extended use.
- Blade: 2.5 stars out of 3.
- Handle: 2 stars out of 3.
- Durability: 1 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 2.5 stars out of 3.
- Performance: 2.5 stars out of 3.
This lightweight Chinese-style cleaver required a little more force to drive it through dense bone, but testers were pleasantly surprised at how effective it was, thanks to a fairly long, tall, very thin, razor-sharp blade. It wasn’t as durable as some other models—its thin blade chipped a bit, and its slightly shorter, slick plastic handle cracked—but even with these flaws, it remained sharp and serviceable at the end of testing.
- Blade: 1.5 stars out of 3.
- Handle: 2 stars out of 3.
- Durability: 1.5 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 3 stars out of 3.
- Performance: 2.5 stars out of 3.
This cleaver’s very long, very tall, very thin blade made it a breeze to maneuver through large butternut squashes and to halve whole ducks, though it sometimes felt a little too big for smaller chicken parts. Because the blade was so thin, its edge felt razor-sharp, but it was also vulnerable to blunting and chipping. And its wooden handle rattled when we chopped, further calling into question its durability. Still, it was generally great at chopping, and we didn’t notice any real decline in sharpness at the end of testing.
Recommended with reservations
- Blade: NaN stars out of 3.
- Handle: NaN stars out of 3.
- Durability: NaN stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: NaN stars out of 3.
- Performance: NaN stars out of 3.
We had high hopes for this meat cleaver, made by Kai, the same manufacturer as our winner. For the most part, we liked its handle, which was a good size and shape for most hands, though it was a tad slippery, especially when wet. Its blade was long, tall, and sharp, so it performed serviceably, cleaving chicken parts well. But that same blade also had an incredibly thick spine, wedging into butternut squash instead of cutting through it cleanly. And it was on the heavy side, so it was hard to wield for long stints without our arms and wrists aching.
- Blade: 1.5 stars out of 3.
- Handle: 2 stars out of 3.
- Durability: 3 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 1 stars out of 3.
- Performance: 2.5 stars out of 3.
Testers were divided on this European-style cleaver. Some loved the power and durability afforded by its weighty construction, but others found it awkward and blade-heavy, in part because of an unusually long bolster, which threw off the balance. The blade itself was very sharp, but because it was also very thick and had a large edge angle, it sometimes wedged itself inside butternut squash instead of slicing through cleanly. Some testers also wished the blade were just a bit taller and longer.
- Blade: 1 stars out of 3.
- Handle: 3 stars out of 3.
- Durability: 2.5 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 1 stars out of 3.
- Performance: 2 stars out of 3.
The handle on this cleaver was great—long and grippy. But the thin blade was shaped like a machete’s and was slightly weighted toward the tip, throwing off the cleaver’s balance. It wasn’t very tall, so it was harder to direct downward through butternut squash. Worse, it was inexplicably blunt and became blunter over the course of testing. This cleaver was the lightest one we tested, which meant we had to use more force to drive it home. Still, it did a decent job of chopping through chicken parts.
- Blade: 2 stars out of 3.
- Handle: 1.5 stars out of 3.
- Durability: 2.5 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 1.5 stars out of 3.
- Performance: 2 stars out of 3.
This inexpensive cleaver had a reasonably long, thin blade, but because it was blade-heavy, it felt awkward in use, and the blade itself seemed a little dull. The handle was on the narrow side, and while testers liked the grippiness of the plastic sleeve encircling it, the sleeve itself limited the usable area of the handle to a cramped 4.25 inches. The blade also chipped a bit during testing.
- Blade: 2 stars out of 3.
- Handle: 1.5 stars out of 3.
- Durability: 3 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 1 stars out of 3.
- Performance: 2 stars out of 3.
Built like a battle ax, this cleaver was the heaviest in our testing, with the bulk of its weight in its blade. As a result, it was hard to aim consistently and to use for long periods of time. Its thick (if relatively sharp) blade was fine for cutting chicken but tended to crack butternut squash and maul delicate roast duck. The handle, while grippy, was too thick for many hands and had a large finger guard that limited its affordance. But this cleaver seemed superdurable—meant to last.
- Blade: 2 stars out of 3.
- Handle: 1.5 stars out of 3.
- Durability: 3 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 1 stars out of 3.
- Performance: 2 stars out of 3.
One of the largest models in our testing, this traditional-looking, blade-heavy cleaver was too big and unwieldy to use comfortably or accurately, wedging (not cutting) through squash and making uneven slices of roast duck. Its blade was sharp but didn’t always feel that way, thanks to a thick edge. And while we liked the grippiness of its handle, its ergonomic bumps and large bolster limited our grip options. Testers and butchers agreed: Unless you break down whole animals in your spare time, this knife is overkill.
- Blade: 1 stars out of 3.
- Handle: 2.5 stars out of 3.
- Durability: 2.5 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 1.5 stars out of 3.
- Performance: 2 stars out of 3.
This cleaver had a nice thin, sharp blade and a comfortable (if slightly narrow) handle. If only we could have supersized it! At just 5.75 inches long and weighing just 11 ounces, it felt better suited to butchering quail than chicken. As a result, we struggled a bit to summon the requisite coverage and leverage when breaking down butternut squash or duck. And while sharp, that thin blade was somewhat vulnerable to chipping.
- Blade: 0.5 stars out of 3.
- Handle: 2 stars out of 3.
- Durability: 2.5 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 2 stars out of 3.
- Performance: 1.5 stars out of 3.
This inexpensive cleaver did a decent job of chopping chicken parts. But at 6 inches long and 2.7 inches high, the very thin, chip-prone blade felt undersized—too small to take on butternut squash or a whole roast duck. Its blade was honed to a 22-degree angle, which meant that it didn’t always feel sharp in action even when it was. Finally, its handle was a little narrow, which cramped larger hands, and a little too slick.
Discontinued
- Blade: 3 stars out of 3.
- Handle: 2.5 stars out of 3.
- Durability: 3 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 3 stars out of 3.
- Performance: 3 stars out of 3.
This meat cleaver put grace and beauty into the most barbarous tasks. Its perfectly distributed weight and long, tall, gently curved, razor-sharp blade made for truly effortless chopping. And its long, straight pakkawood handle gave us plenty of grip options, although at times its smooth surface got a little slick. Yes, this cleaver is expensive—but you’ll never need another. Strong and durable, it breezed through testing with minimal wear.
DISCONTINUED
- Blade: 2 stars out of 3.
- Handle: 2.5 stars out of 3.
- Durability: 2.5 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 2 stars out of 3.
- Performance: 2.5 stars out of 3.
This cleaver won over testers with its sharp, clean cuts and long, sturdy, comfortable (if slightly narrow) handle. Lightweight, it was easy to lift, but it required a little extra force to drive through bigger bones. A few testers wished its machete-like blade were a bit taller—it was trickier to direct through a big butternut squash and a whole duck, and we couldn’t scoop as much food up with it. Because the blade was thin, it chipped a little, but this knife still felt keen and capable at the end of testing.
Reviews you can trust
Reviews you can trust
The mission of America’s Test Kitchen Reviews is to find the best equipment and ingredients for the home cook through rigorous, hands-on testing. We stand behind our winners so much that we even put our seal of approval on them.
Miye Bromberg
Miye is a senior editor for ATK Reviews. She covers booze, blades, and gadgets of questionable value.