Ideal Weight Calculator
Find your ideal weight based on height and body type
Ideal Weight Calculator
Find your ideal weight based on height and body type
What is an Ideal Weight Calculator?
An ideal weight calculator estimates a target body weight range based on your height, sex, and body frame. Unlike BMI, which gives a single number, ideal weight formulas provide a weight range considered healthy for a given height. Multiple different formulas exist — developed independently by different medical researchers — and this calculator shows results from all of them for comparison.
The four most widely used formulas are: the Devine formula (1974, originally for drug dosing), the Robinson formula (1983), the Miller formula (1983), and the Hamwi formula (1964). Each was developed for slightly different clinical contexts and produces slightly different results. No single formula is universally accepted as the most accurate.
Important caveat: "ideal weight" is a statistical concept based on population averages, not an individual prescription. Muscle mass, bone density, body proportions, and ethnic background all affect what a healthy weight looks like for a specific person. Use this as a reference range, not a goal.
How to Use This Calculator
Frame Size Determination (Wrist Circumference)
- • Men height > 165cm: Small <16.5cm · Medium 16.5–18cm · Large >18cm
- • Women height > 158cm: Small <14cm · Medium 14–14.6cm · Large >14.6cm
- • Wrist method note: Elbow breadth method is more accurate but needs a caliper
Why 'Ideal Weight' Is a Range, Not a Target
Three of the four formulas here — Devine, Robinson, and Hamwi — were originally built for clinical purposes that have nothing to do with fitness or aesthetics: Devine's formula was designed to help doctors dose medications accurately based on estimated lean body weight, and Hamwi's was built for diabetes care calculations in the 1960s. None of them were designed as fitness or physique goals, which is worth remembering before treating the output as something to chase.
Two people of identical height can healthily differ in weight by 15kg or more depending on frame size, bone density, and how much muscle they carry — a large-framed, muscular person and a small-framed, lean person at the same height are both perfectly healthy at very different weights. This is exactly why the calculator shows a range across four formulas rather than pretending there is one correct number.
These formulas also predate modern body composition tools by decades — they were built before body fat percentage measurement and BMI were in routine use, at a time when weight alone was the only practical number doctors had. Used today, they work best as one reference point alongside body fat percentage and how you actually look and perform, not as a standalone verdict.
?Frequently Asked Questions
No single formula is definitively "most accurate" — they were all developed for different clinical purposes. The Robinson formula is most commonly cited in current medical literature. The Devine formula is still widely used for pharmaceutical drug dosing calculations. For practical purposes, looking at the range across all four formulas gives a more realistic picture than relying on any single one.
Ideal weight formulas are designed for the general population and are not appropriate as performance targets for athletes. A 175cm male sprinter might ideally weigh 70–75kg by these formulas, but many elite sprinters carry 80–85kg of predominantly muscle mass. Athletes should work with sports dietitians who factor in sport-specific body composition requirements.
The classic formulas do not account for age. However, body composition naturally changes with age — muscle mass tends to decrease and fat mass tends to increase after age 30 even at the same body weight. Some clinicians suggest that slightly higher BMI (up to 27) may be acceptable and even protective in adults over 65, based on studies showing U-shaped mortality curves.
All four formulas were derived from general population data, not from athletes or resistance-trained individuals, so they systematically underestimate a healthy weight for anyone carrying above-average muscle mass. A well-muscled person will typically weigh more than these formulas suggest while still being lean and healthy — this is the same limitation BMI has, and it's why frame size and body fat percentage matter more than the raw formula output for anyone who trains regularly.
No widely-used ideal weight formula was developed specifically for South Asian populations — all four here originate from Western clinical research. However, similar to BMI, some Indian health guidelines suggest interpreting these ranges cautiously given known differences in body fat distribution at a given weight for South Asian populations. Using the lower end of the range shown, alongside a body fat percentage check, is a reasonable practical approach.
No. All four formulas were derived from adult populations and are not valid for children or teenagers, whose healthy weight depends on age- and sex-specific growth percentiles rather than a fixed adult formula. Parents and young athletes should use pediatric growth charts from a doctor rather than adult ideal-weight calculators.
Because no single formula has been established as definitively correct — each was built for a different clinical purpose and a different reference population, so they naturally disagree by a few kilograms. Showing all four together, rather than picking one to display, is more honest about the genuine uncertainty involved than presenting false precision from a single formula.