Maximum heart rate calculator
Estimate your maximum heart rate with five published equations at once, from the classic 220 − age to newer research formulas. The spread between them is the honest answer to “what is my max?”.
Maximum heart rate calculator
Enter your age to see the results. Everything is calculated in this page; nothing is sent.
The equations
- 220 − age. The best-known rule, attributed to Fox, Naughton and Haskell in 1971. A detailed history found it was drawn by eye through about 35 published data points rather than calculated[1][2].
- 208 − 0.7 × age (Tanaka, 2001). Based on 351 studies with 18,712 people and checked in a lab study of 514 healthy adults aged 18 to 81; sex and activity level made no difference[3].
- 207 − 0.7 × age (Gellish, 2007). From 908 treadmill tests of 132 adults followed for up to 25 years[4].
- 211 − 0.64 × age (Nes, 2013). From maximal tests of 3,320 healthy adults in Norway’s HUNT Fitness Study[5].
- 206 − 0.88 × age (Gulati, 2010). From treadmill tests of 5,437 women without symptoms, and meant for women[6].
Estimates by age
Rounded to whole beats per minute:
| Age | 208 − 0.7 × age | 220 − age | 207 − 0.7 × age | 211 − 0.64 × age | 206 − 0.88 × age |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20 | 194 | 200 | 193 | 198 | 188 |
| 30 | 187 | 190 | 186 | 192 | 180 |
| 40 | 180 | 180 | 179 | 185 | 171 |
| 50 | 173 | 170 | 172 | 179 | 162 |
| 60 | 166 | 160 | 165 | 173 | 153 |
| 70 | 159 | 150 | 158 | 166 | 144 |
| 80 | 152 | 140 | 151 | 160 | 136 |
The equations agree closely for young adults and drift apart with age. At 70, 220 − age gives 150 while Tanaka gives 159 and Nes 166. That is why the choice matters most for older exercisers.
How far off can an estimate be?
Every equation describes an average. Individual maximums scatter around the line: Tanaka reports a standard deviation of about 10 beats per minute[3], and Nes a standard error of 10.8[5]. In practice that means roughly two out of three people land within about 10 bpm of their estimate and the rest further away. The authors of the 220 − age history went further and concluded that no current method estimates an individual’s maximum acceptably[2].
So use an estimate as a starting point for zones, not as a fact about you. If the zones built on it feel far too easy or far too hard, the estimate is probably the reason.
Measured maximum heart rate
The equations above were all built from maximal exercise tests, in which people work to exhaustion on a treadmill or bike while their heart rate is recorded, often under clinical supervision. A value from such a test is the most reliable number you can use; enter it in the zone calculator and it replaces the estimate. If you have a heart condition or symptoms such as chest pain with exertion, talk to a clinician before any all-out effort.
Maximum heart rate is not a measure of fitness. In the large datasets behind Tanaka’s and Nes’s equations, activity level and fitness made little or no difference to it; age did[3][5]. Resting heart rate is where differences between people show more: the AHA notes that lower resting rates are common in athletes[7].
What to do with your number
Maximum heart rate is the ceiling for training zones and target ranges. The target heart rate page turns it into moderate and vigorous ranges, the Karvonen formula combines it with your resting rate, and the zone 2 page explains the easy endurance zone that is popular right now.
Questions people ask
Is 220 minus age accurate?
As an average it is serviceable for younger adults, but it was never fitted statistically and tends to underestimate maximum heart rate in older adults compared with newer equations[2][3].
What is the maximum heart rate for a woman?
Gulati’s equation, 206 − 0.88 × age, was fitted to women. Tanaka found no difference between men and women in its data, so 208 − 0.7 × age is also a reasonable choice. Expect about ±10 bpm either way.
Does fitness change maximum heart rate?
Not much, according to the large datasets behind these equations: Tanaka and Nes found little or no effect of activity level or fitness. Age is the main factor.
Why is my watch showing a higher max than the formula?
If your watch has recorded a higher heart rate during hard efforts, that observed value is closer to your real maximum than an age formula. Make sure the reading was not a sensor spike.
Can I exceed my maximum heart rate?
By definition the true maximum is the highest your heart reaches. If you regularly see numbers above your estimate, your estimate is simply too low for you.
Sources
- Fox SM, Naughton JP, Haskell WL. Physical activity and the prevention of coronary heart disease. Ann Clin Res 1971;3(6):404–432 (as reproduced and analysed by Robergs & Landwehr 2002). PubMed 4945367. Checked 2026-10-09.
- Robergs RA, Landwehr R. The surprising history of the “HRmax = 220 − age” equation. J Exerc Physiol Online 2002;5(2):1–10. asep.org. Checked 2026-10-09.
- Tanaka H, Monahan KD, Seals DR. Age-predicted maximal heart rate revisited. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001;37(1):153–156. doi:10.1016/S0735-1097(00)01054-8. Checked 2026-10-09.
- Gellish RL, Goslin BR, Olson RE, et al. Longitudinal modeling of the relationship between age and maximal heart rate. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2007;39(5):822–829. doi:10.1097/mss.0b013e31803349c6. Checked 2026-10-09.
- Nes BM, Janszky I, Wisløff U, Støylen A, Karlsen T. Age-predicted maximal heart rate in healthy subjects: the HUNT fitness study. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2013;23(6):697–704. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0838.2012.01445.x. Checked 2026-10-09.
- Gulati M, Shaw LJ, Thisted RA, et al. Heart rate response to exercise stress testing in asymptomatic women: the St. James Women Take Heart Project. Circulation 2010;122(2):130–137. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.110.939249. Checked 2026-10-09.
- American Heart Association. All About Heart Rate (Pulse) (last reviewed May 13, 2024). heart.org. Checked 2026-10-09.