I would say “no”. Mainly because you can hit the ground harder with shoes on if your running. When barefoot you’ll also be partially concerned about where your stepping rather than speed.
Barefoot running changes your stride. You run with a mid foot strike instead of a heel strike. You can hit the ground just as fast like this since you use your whole foot as a spring instead of relying on your knees and the heel of your shoe. The biggest difference in barefoot running is how short your strides will be but you run the same speed. After you’ve built up callouses on your feet that is. That part sucks.
Barefoot running requires another technique, where you run more on the balls of your feet. You can learn this, but it will take time. So straight away I will say no.
But in the time you will take to learn, so you’ll practice. By practice you shall become better at running, so there I will say you’ll still be faster.
Of course not. If this were the case marathoners would run barefoot. Also I would suggest if youre trying barefoot outdoors you not start by running a mile as it will probably mess up your usually shoed feet.
Olympic marathons have been won by barefoot runners. Abebe Bikila from Ethiopia did it in the 1960s Rome Olympics.
There’s a difference between one mile and a marathon. The latter will wear your shoes out. One mile won’t if you do it often enough. But the main point, that even one mile runners use shoes, nonetheless stands.
Good running shoes are engineered to increase performance. You will definitely be slower without.
Nike actually makes a running shoe which used a carbon reinforced sole IIRC which is supposed to make you use a bit less energy when running. So I’ll put in my vote for no, you won’t be faster barefoot.
I imagine the surface matters a lot. Running on pavement? Shards of glass?