As companies prioritize employee well-being in 2025, a key question emerges: should you invest in an on-site office gym, or offer employees a wellness stipend to use on their own? Both approaches aim to encourage fitness and health, but they work in very different ways. Corporate decision-makers and HR teams are looking at the data to determine which option delivers better results for employee wellness engagement, satisfaction, and ROI.
Understanding the Options
Before diving into the numbers, let's clarify the two approaches:
Wellness Stipend
A wellness stipend is a fixed amount of money given to employees (monthly or annually) to spend on wellness-related expenses of their choice. This could include gym memberships, fitness classes, home exercise equipment, meditation apps, massages, or other health services. Many companies offer something like $30–$100 per month, or a few hundred dollars a year for wellness.
On-Site Office Gym
This refers to having a dedicated fitness facility at the workplace – ranging from a small room with basic equipment to a full gym floor in a corporate HQ. The company bears the cost of setting up and maintaining the gym, and employees typically use it for free. The benefit here is convenience and community: a gym down the hall makes it easier for employees to fit in workouts together during the workday.
Many companies actually utilize both approaches – for example, maintaining a small office gym and offering a stipend or reimbursement for external fitness activities, especially for remote staff. But budget realities often force a choice or emphasis on one.
Employee Preferences: Gym Access vs. Cash Allowance
What do employees say they want? Recent surveys provide interesting insights:
The takeaway is that both options are quite popular – a majority of employees like each approach. Slightly more people (in this data set) leaned toward gym memberships. This might be because a gym membership's value is easily understood ("I get free access to a gym, great!"), whereas a stipend's impact depends on the individual's proactiveness to use it well.
Key Insight
It's notable that 49% of companies now subsidize gym memberships or wellness apps for employees as of 2025. This indicates many employers are offering something akin to stipends or direct reimbursement for fitness outside the office. Remote-friendly benefits (like stipends or virtual programs) are on the rise, while purely on-site offerings see a slight decline in emphasis.
Participation and Engagement Levels
A critical factor in deciding between a stipend and a gym is: which one will employees actually use? A benefit only delivers results if people take advantage of it.
On-Site Gym Engagement
Studies have found that on-site fitness facilities often suffer from low utilization if not actively managed. According to research cited by IncentFit, only about 50% of employees with access to an on-site gym use it, and only half of that group use it regularly. That implies roughly only 25% of total employees become consistent gym users.
Without active promotion and culture support
Wellness Stipend Engagement
At first glance, usage of stipends might be higher – after all, if you hand out $50/month, most employees will likely redeem it. But the deeper question is whether they use it for actual wellness activities. HR leaders report that stipends can turn into just a cash perk, with little measurable impact on health behavior.
When stipends are tied to actual activity visits
However, companies that drive engagement see much better numbers. For example, when leadership participates in wellness programs, average employee participation can reach 80%. Programs like group workouts, fitness challenges, or having volunteer "gym champions" can dramatically improve usage of an office gym.
Cost, ROI, and Administration
From a cost perspective, how do stipends and gyms compare, and which yields better ROI for the company?
5-Year Cost Comparison Example
- Option A: $50/month stipend × 50 employees = $30,000/year × 5 years = $150,000
- Option B: $30,000 gym setup + $5,000/year maintenance × 5 years = $55,000
For stable workforces, investing in a gym is an asset that amortizes over time and can provide greater long-term value.
Administrative Considerations
Running an on-site gym has logistics like managing access and ensuring safety protocols, but these are relatively low admin once set up. Wellness stipends can have a higher admin burden on HR/Finance: verifying receipts, handling reimbursements or taxable benefit processing, and fielding questions on what's eligible.
ROI Tracking
On-site gyms have documented ROI in aggregate (potentially $3 return per $1 spent in broad wellness programs). Wellness stipends' ROI is harder to quantify because usage varies – one employee might see great health improvements (ROI positive), another might see none.
Side-by-Side Comparison
Here's a comprehensive comparison of Wellness Stipend vs. Office Gym on key factors:
| Factor | Wellness Stipend | On-Site Office Gym |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Structure | Variable cost per employee per year. Easy to scale up/down; no large upfront investment. | Fixed upfront investment with ongoing maintenance. Higher initial cost but asset depreciates over years. |
| Administration | Requires tracking and reimbursing claims, verifying usage. Can be automated with vendors, but some admin overhead. | Requires facility management (access, cleaning, safety checks). Once set up, day-to-day admin is minimal. |
| Employee Choice | Highly flexible – employees choose gyms, classes, or wellness activities that suit them. Increases inclusivity for various interests and abilities. | Limited to fitness activities available in the gym. Caters well to those who like gym workouts, but less so to those who prefer external activities. |
| Reach (Hybrid Workforce) | Available to all employees regardless of location (great for remote teams). Everyone gets equal benefit value. | Primarily benefits in-office or on-site employees. Remote workers may be excluded (which could cause disparity). |
| Engagement Rates | Usage varies: many will use it, but some may not utilize it for actual health improvement. Harder to measure impact on health behavior. | If well-promoted, can create a core fitness user group at work. Visible usage may inspire others. Risk of under-utilization if not embedded in culture. |
| Cultural Impact | Individual-focused; less direct impact on workplace culture since activities happen off-site or privately. | Can foster on-site wellness culture, group workouts, and peer support. Tangibly demonstrates company's commitment to wellness. |
| ROI Potential | Can improve wellness if employees engage. ROI hard to track; depends on self-reported outcomes. | Proven ROI when utilized: reductions in healthcare costs, sick days, etc., have been documented. Tangible improvements more directly observable. |
Trends and 2025 Outlook
Data from 2024 and 2025 suggests a growing trend of companies trying to combine the strengths of both models. For example, some firms partner with services like ClassPass or Gympass (now Wellhub) which provide employees access to a network of gyms and studios.
Platform Success Data
The Wellhub study in 2024 noted that companies using their platform (which is effectively a stipend/app hybrid) had 77% of them achieving over 100% ROI on wellness – compared to 53% without such a platform. This indicates that when employees have flexible options AND the company gets data and support on usage, the outcomes improve.
From the employee perspective, many appreciate having an on-site gym for the community and convenience, and a stipend for things the gym doesn't cover (like a nutrition program or a weekend rock-climbing pass). In 2025, with well-being a top priority, employers are less often choosing gym vs. stipend as a binary, and more often asking "what mix of offerings will maximize our team's wellness engagement?"
Making the Choice for Your Company
The data in 2025 doesn't hand us an absolute winner – both wellness stipends and office gyms have proven benefits, and each has potential pitfalls if implemented poorly.
Decision Framework
- Consider your workforce: How many employees are in the office daily versus remote?
- Assess employee preferences: Send a quick survey about gym vs. stipend preferences
- Evaluate your space and budget: Do you have space for a gym and capital to build one?
- Think long-term: Gyms are assets that amortize; stipends are ongoing expenses
- Plan for engagement: How will you ensure whichever option you choose gets used?
For many organizations, the optimal solution is a balanced approach: provide a basic on-site fitness facility for those who enjoy it, and offer a stipend or reimbursement program so others can pursue external wellness activities. This combined strategy covers all bases and shows employees you're invested in their well-being in multiple ways.
Remember, programs only work if people use them, so whichever route you take, pair it with education, encouragement, and maybe a dash of friendly competition. In the end, whether it's via a flexible stipend or a shiny new gym, investing in employee wellness is likely to pay off. Healthier employees are more productive, engaged, and loyal.
Sources: Employee preference stats from HR Dive (Opinium survey); utilization and engagement data from IncentFit and Aaptiv analyses; corporate wellness trend reports by Wellable and SHRM; ROI and cost insights from SHRM and Gympass/Wellhub reports.