// Weight-Loss Calculators

Weight Loss Timeline Calculator

The arithmetic is easy. What it leaves out is the part worth reading, so this shows four rates rather than one.

Your details

Your result

To lose
0kg
At 0.25 kg a week
At 0.5 kg a week
At 0.75 kg a week
At 1 kg a week
Your planned rate, as a share of bodyweight
0.67%/week
First check-in
4 weeks
Then re-read the plan every
4 weeks
  • These are divisions, not forecasts. Every row assumes the rate holds every week from now until the end, and none of them knows about a holiday, an injury, a birthday or a week you simply do not feel like it.
  • The rate is also the part that moves. A lighter body needs less energy to run, so the deficit that produced a kilogram a month ago produces less than a kilogram now, and the number the arithmetic promised drifts further out the longer the plan runs. That is why the four rows are here instead of one, and why the check-in matters more than the finish line.
  • Four weeks is long enough for water, food volume and hormonal shifts to stop dominating the scale, and short enough to change something while it still matters. What you do at that point is compare the actual trend against the row you picked, and adjust the plan rather than the target.

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

The headline is the size of the job: how many kilograms sit between where you are and where you want to be. Under it are four rows, one for each weekly rate, and they are the same subtraction divided four ways.

Four rather than one, deliberately. A single figure under a label like Estimated time reads as a forecast, and the division behind it is not forecasting anything — it is describing a plan that holds perfectly every week from now until the end. Showing the spread makes the choice visible: 10 kg is 40 weeks at a quarter-kilo a week and 10 weeks at a full one, and those are different years of your life, not different arithmetic.

The share-of-bodyweight row is the sanity check. Half a kilo a week is 0.57% of bodyweight at 88 kg and 0.71% at 70 kg — the same plan asks progressively more of you as you get lighter, which is a large part of why plans stall in month three rather than month one.

The check-in rows are the actual product. Four weeks is long enough for water, food volume and hormonal shifts to stop dominating the scale, and short enough that you can change something while it still matters. What you do at that point is compare the real trend against the row you picked — and then adjust the plan, not the target.

How it is calculated

Goal gap divided by weekly rate, shown at every offered rate

Gap = current weight − goal weight Weeks at a rate = gap ÷ that rate Share of bodyweight = rate ÷ current weight × 100 All four offered rates are shown, not just the one selected. There is no energy term anywhere in this page. No 7,700 kcal per kilogram, no 3,500 per pound, and no conversion between a deficit and a date.

What it assumes

  • The rate holds every week. This is the assumption the whole page is built to undermine, because it is the one that fails: the arithmetic knows nothing about a holiday, an injury, a wedding, a bad month at work, or a week you simply do not feel like it.
  • The rate itself is treated as fixed, and it is not. A lighter body needs less energy to run, so the same deficit produces less loss as you go, and the gap between the row you picked and what the scale does widens the longer the plan runs.
  • Scale weight is being tracked, not fat. What the scale reports includes water, gut contents and glycogen, and over a week those move enough to hide or fake real change in either direction.
  • No adjustment for starting weight, sex, age, training or diet composition. Every one of those changes what actually happens, and none of them is in a subtraction and a division.

Units and rounding

  • Both weights in kilograms; the gap comes back in kilograms to one decimal place.
  • The rate is a weekly figure in kilograms per week, chosen from the same four options the deficit calculator offers — so a rate picked there means the same thing here.
  • Weeks are rounded to whole numbers, because the input does not justify decimals. A projection accurate to a tenth of a week is a projection pretending.
  • If the goal is at or above your current weight, the gap is zero and every row reads as a dash rather than a negative timeline.

Worked example

Someone at 88 kg who wants to reach 78 kg, planning half a kilo a week.

  1. Gap = 88 − 78 = 10 kg
  2. At 0.25 kg a week: 10 ÷ 0.25 = 40 weeks
  3. At 0.5 kg a week: 10 ÷ 0.5 = 20 weeks
  4. At 0.75 kg a week: 10 ÷ 0.75 = 13 weeks
  5. At 1 kg a week: 10 ÷ 1 = 10 weeks
  6. The planned 0.5 kg is 0.5 ÷ 88 × 100 = 0.57% of bodyweight a week

Twenty weeks at the planned rate — and the row above and below it are the reason to read the whole table. The difference between the gentlest and the most aggressive plan here is thirty weeks, which is the real decision. What none of the four rows is, is a date: they are what the subtraction gives if nothing interrupts, and something always interrupts.

Limitations

  • This does not predict your weight loss, and it is not trying to. It divides. The value of it is in seeing the four rates side by side and picking one you can actually live with, not in the precision of any single row.
  • The arithmetic gets steadily more optimistic as the plan runs. Energy expenditure falls as bodyweight falls, so a deficit that produced half a kilo in week one produces less than half a kilo in week twenty — meaning the later weeks of every row here are the least trustworthy part of it.
  • A faster row is not a better row. The only rate worth choosing is the one still being followed in month four, and the most common failure is picking the aggressive line in week one and abandoning the whole thing by week six.
  • It says nothing about what you should weigh. The goal is your input, and a number typed into a field is not evidence that the number is right for you.
  • Weight is not fat. On a plan with training, particularly a new one, muscle and water move in directions that can hide real fat loss on the scale for weeks. If the tape and the mirror disagree with the scale, they are not automatically the ones that are wrong.
  • None of this is medical advice, and a rate that suits one person can be inappropriate for another. Anyone pregnant, breastfeeding, managing a health condition or taking prescribed medication should be having this conversation with a doctor rather than a calculator.

What to do next

  • Pick the rate you would still be following in month four, not the one you like the look of today. That is a different question from which row is shortest, and it is the one the table exists to make you ask.
  • Set the deficit that produces that rate on the calorie deficit calculator, which is where the energy arithmetic belongs. It offers the same four rates for exactly this reason.
  • Weigh several mornings a week and read the weekly average, not any single reading. Day-to-day movement is routinely larger than a week of real change, which is what makes one morning so easy to over-read.
  • At four weeks, compare the trend against the row you picked. If it is slower, change the plan before you change the goal — and if it is dramatically faster, that is also information worth acting on.

Sources

Related calculators
View all calculators →
// Frequently Asked

Questions, answered.

How long will it take me to lose 10 kg?

At the four rates this page offers: 40 weeks, 20 weeks, 13 weeks or 10 weeks. That spread is the honest answer, and the reason it is a spread rather than a number is that the arithmetic assumes a rate holding perfectly for the whole run. What actually determines your answer is which of those four you are still following in month four.

Why does the page not give me one estimate?

Because one estimate would be more confident than the arithmetic behind it. A single figure under Estimated time reads as a prediction, and this is a subtraction divided by a rate — it has no information about you beyond two weights. Four rows say what the tool actually knows, which is what each rate would buy if it held.

Is 1 kg a week too fast?

This page will not rule on that, because the right rate depends on your starting point, how much you have to lose, what you are training, and what you can sustain — none of which is in the two fields above. What the share-of-bodyweight row does tell you is that a fixed weekly rate asks more of you the lighter you get.

Why do the later weeks matter less than the early ones?

Because a lighter body costs less to run. The energy you spend falls as your weight falls, so the same eating pattern produces steadily less loss over time, and the arithmetic on this page cannot see that happening. It is why every row is most reliable at the start and least reliable at the end, and why the four-week review is worth more than the projection.

The scale has not moved in two weeks. Is the plan broken?

Not necessarily, and two weeks is usually too short to tell. Water, gut contents, salt, sleep and training all move scale weight by amounts comparable to a fortnight of real change. That is what the four-week checkpoint is for — long enough for the noise to average out, short enough to still act on.

Can I use pounds instead?

The fields are in kilograms and the rates are kilograms per week, so convert before entering. What the page will not do is offer a pounds mode with a 3,500-calorie rule attached, because that rule has the same problem as the kilogram version — it treats a moving target as a constant.

Week one is easy. Week nine is the one that decides it.

The rate that works is the one you are still on in month four, and that has more to do with how a week is built than with willpower. If you would rather set that up with someone than guess at it, the guided tour at Al Manhal is free.

Book Free Tour