Introduction Body positioning and perfusion changes have been studied to better understand cardiovascular adaptive mechanisms when moving from our bipedal condition to seated or supine.  Biomechanics are thought to challenge hemodynamics and trigger regulation mechanisms, although these relationships are still poorly described. Center of pressure (CoP) location and displacement and plantar pressure are common measures to assess postural stability.   Aims/objectives To explore how the differences in plantar pressure and location and displacement of the CoP might relate to the perfusion variations in vivo during upright standing and functional movement.   Methods Eight participants (25.1 ± 5.2 y.o) of both sexes (4 female and 4 male) were selected following specific inclusion criteria. All participants were healthy and without peripheral vascular disease (ABI=1.0±0.1), and procedures respected the principles of good clinical practice adopted for human research. The experimental design involved the application of two protocols with three phases – five minutes standing at rest (Phase 1), two minutes performing a challenge movement – squat (protocol I) or single leg squat (protocol II) (Phase 2) and five minutes recovery in the standing position (Phase 3). Perfusion was assessed on both feet with laser Doppler flowmetry (LDF) sensors applied to the dorsum of the foot between the 3rd and 4th toes. The dorsal region perfusion of both feet was also measured by contactless polarized spectroscopy (PS). To assess postural data, a Foot Scan® RsScan International® Balance pressure plate was used to access center of pressure displacement and velocity, along with pressure for each foot within specific foot regions. Statistical analysis was performed with GraphPad Prism. Parametric tests were performed to assess variables by paired t-test. A 95% level of confidence was adopted.   Results and Discussion A consistent increase in perfusion was recorded with both protocols (Phase II). With the squat (protocol I), a significant difference relative to rest (Phase I) was noted using LDF in Phase II and III (p = 0.0001). In protocol II, only the foot of the supporting limb for the one-legged squat shows significant differences in recovery (Phase III) with both LDF and TiVi. During the orthostatic posture,  the distribution ratio of plantar pressure between the forefoot and the hindfoot was 4:6 when the feet were parallel to each other (standing position). The maximal elliptical displacement exhibited the expected significant differences in the center of mass between resting Phase I and recovery Phase III as compared to the challenge Phase II. In Protocol 1, Correlations between pressure and perfusion variables were noted. In protocol 1, Phase II, LDF correlates negatively (p<0.05) with forefoot pressure and positively (p<0.05) with midfoot pressure. In Phase III, LDF correlates negatively (p<0.05) with forefoot pressure, CoP displacement correlates positively (p<0.05) with forefoot pressure and negatively (p<0.05) with midfoot pressure, while CoP velocity correlates positively (p<0.05) with forefoot pressure. CoP displacement and velocity correlate negatively (p<0.05) with LDF in Phase III.   Conclusions Results suggest that body position plays a fundamental role in the magnitude and duration of hemodynamic responses from rest to active movement.