// Basic Fitness Calculators

Ideal Weight Calculator

Enter your height and sex to see what four published formulas suggest, and how far apart they land.

Your details

Your result

Ideal weight (avg)
70kg
Devine
70.5kg
Robinson
68.9kg
Miller
68.7kg
Hamwi
72kg

Estimates are for general guidance only and are not medical advice. For a personalised plan, book a free guided tour at RPM Gym.

What your result means

You get five numbers: four formula results and their average. The spread between them is the useful part. For most adults the four land within four or five kilograms of each other, which tells you something the headline average hides — none of them is measuring you.

All four are height-based. They take no account of your frame, your muscle, your training history or where you carry weight, because they were never built to. Devine wrote his in 1974 to scale drug doses to body size. The others adjusted his intercepts against different populations. None was designed to tell a gym member what to weigh.

How it is calculated

Devine (1974), Robinson (1983), Miller (1983) and Hamwi (1964)

h = height in inches above 60 Devine men 50.0 + 2.3h · women 45.5 + 2.3h Robinson men 52.0 + 1.9h · women 49.0 + 1.7h Miller men 56.2 + 1.41h · women 53.1 + 1.36h Hamwi men 48.0 + 2.7h · women 45.5 + 2.2h

What it assumes

  • Every formula is linear above five feet, which is why they diverge most at the extremes of height. Below 152 cm the intercept does almost all the work and the results stop being meaningful.
  • Sex is the only variable besides height. Two people of the same height and sex get the same answer whether one of them lifts and the other doesn't.
  • The formulas were fitted to mid-twentieth-century reference populations, mostly North American, which is part of why they disagree.

Units and rounding

  • Height in centimetres, converted to inches internally because the published formulas are defined in imperial units.
  • Results in kilograms to one decimal place.
  • Heights outside a plausible adult range return no result rather than an extrapolated figure.

Worked example

A man of 178 cm.

  1. 178 cm = 70.1 inches, so h = 10.1 inches above 60
  2. Devine = 50.0 + (2.3 × 10.1) = 73.2 kg
  3. Robinson = 52.0 + (1.9 × 10.1) = 71.1 kg
  4. Miller = 56.2 + (1.41 × 10.1) = 70.4 kg
  5. Hamwi = 48.0 + (2.7 × 10.1) = 75.2 kg

Four published formulas, a 4.8 kg spread, and an average of 72.5 kg. Treating 72.5 as a target while ignoring that Hamwi says 75.2 and Miller says 70.4 is reading precision into a disagreement.

Limitations

  • None of these formulas can see body composition. A lifter at 80 kg and someone untrained at 80 kg get the same answer, and only one of them should think about losing weight.
  • They were derived for clinical dosing and reference tables, not for setting a physique goal. Using one as a personal target is a use it was never validated for.
  • Frame size is absent. Wrist and shoulder width vary enough between adults of the same height to move a sensible weight several kilograms in either direction.
  • Athletes, older adults and anyone carrying significant muscle sit furthest from where these formulas point.
  • A number well outside the range they produce is worth discussing with a doctor. A number just outside it usually means the formula is wrong about you, not that you are wrong.

What to do next

  • Use the spread, not the average. If the four formulas put you between 70 and 75 kg, that band is the honest answer, and anywhere in it is defensible.
  • If you want a range that at least accounts for height properly, the BMI calculator publishes the healthy weight range for your height directly. It's the same input doing more useful work.
  • If what you actually want to change is composition rather than the scale number, body fat percentage is the measure that tracks it. Weight can stay flat while that moves.
  • Set a calorie target from your maintenance level before choosing a rate of change. A goal weight without a calorie baseline is a wish.

Sources

Related calculators
View all calculators →
// Frequently Asked

Questions, answered.

Which ideal weight formula is most accurate?

None of them is accurate about an individual, because none measures anything about you except height. Robinson and Miller were both attempts to improve on Devine and both landed somewhere different, which is the clearest evidence available that there is no single right answer here.

Why do the four formulas give different results?

They were fitted to different reference populations and use different intercepts and slopes. Hamwi came first, in 1964, from clinical practice. Devine followed in 1974 for drug dosing. Robinson and Miller both published revisions in 1983 using different data. Each is internally consistent and none agrees with the others.

Is ideal weight the same as a healthy BMI?

No. A healthy BMI is a band derived from population health data, and it covers a wide weight range at any height. These formulas produce a single point from a linear equation. They answer different questions and the point often sits below the middle of the BMI band.

Should I use this to set a goal weight?

As a rough orientation, yes. As a target to chase, no. A goal weight is more useful when it comes from where you are now, how fast you can sensibly change, and what you want your training to do — not from a formula that only knows how tall you are.

Does the calculator account for muscle?

It can't. Height is the only body measurement it takes. That's why a lifter almost always reads above every one of these numbers while carrying less fat than someone reading below them.

Four formulas, four answers. A coach can tell you which direction actually matters.

Bring the numbers to a free guided tour at RPM Gym in Al Manhal and we'll look at composition and training, which is where the useful version of this question lives.

Book Free Tour