Waist to Hip Ratio Calculator

Where your body stores fat, not just how much — with the WHO thresholds, and the waist measurement on its own, because the ratio alone can hide a real risk.

Conversion table

Waist	Waist to Hip Ratio	Risk Band (WHO)	Fat Distribution
40	0.40	Low risk	Pear — more around the hips
50	0.50	Low risk	Pear — more around the hips
60	0.60	Low risk	Pear — more around the hips
70	0.70	Low risk	Pear — more around the hips
75	0.75	Low risk	Pear — more around the hips
80	0.80	Moderate risk	Fairly even
90	0.90	High risk	Apple — more around the middle
100	1.00	High risk	Apple — more around the middle
150	1.50	High risk	Apple — more around the middle
200	2.00	High risk	Apple — more around the middle

📊 WHO Risk Bands

Female — lowbelow 0.80
Female — moderate0.80 to 0.85
Female — high0.85 and above
Male — lowbelow 0.90
Male — moderate0.90 to 1.00
Male — high1.00 and above

Getting a Measurement Worth Trusting

Waist goes midway between your lowest rib and the top of your hip bone — usually a little above the navel. Measuring at the navel or at the trouser line is the single commonest error and can shift you a whole band.
Measure at the end of a normal breath out, standing, with the tape snug but not compressing the skin. Do not hold your stomach in.
Hips go around the widest part of the buttocks, over thin clothing or bare skin, with the tape level all the way round.
Measure three times and take the middle value. Two centimetres of drift is enough to move the ratio by 0.02, and the bands are only 0.05 apart.

It Measures Distribution, Not Amount

Two people can carry the same total fat and face very different risks depending on where it sits. Fat around the waist is largely visceral — packed around the liver, pancreas and intestines — and it behaves metabolically in a way that fat on the hips and thighs does not, releasing free fatty acids straight into the portal circulation. Fat on the hips is mostly subcutaneous and, if anything, appears protective. The waist-to-hip ratio is the crudest possible way to ask which of the two you have more of: divide one circumference by the other. It says nothing about how much fat you carry in total, which is what BMI attempts, and nothing about how much you carry for your size, which is what the waist-to-height ratio does. It answers one question only, and answers it with a tape measure.

Why the Waist Is Also Shown on Its Own

A ratio has a denominator, and a large denominator flatters the result. Someone with genuinely wide hips can carry a waist well into the WHO's high-risk range and still return a reassuring ratio, because the hips absorbed the arithmetic. That is not a hypothetical: it is the standard criticism of the measure, and the reason the WHO publishes waist circumference thresholds that stand on their own — 94 and 102 centimetres for men, 80 and 88 for women. This page shows both, side by side, and if they disagree the waist figure is the one to take seriously. A ratio that says low risk while the waist alone says substantially increased is not a clean bill of health; it is the ratio failing in the way it is known to fail.

How It Differs From the Other Waist Measures

Waist-to-HEIGHT ratio divides waist by height, and asks how much abdominal fat you carry for your size. Its rule of thumb is to keep your waist under half your height.
Waist-to-HIP ratio, this page, divides waist by hips, and asks how your fat is distributed between the two.
BMI uses no circumference at all and cannot tell abdominal fat from any other kind, which is why a muscular person can register as overweight.
If you only ever measure one thing, most current guidance favours waist circumference or waist-to-height over the hip ratio, because they need one measurement instead of two.
Where the two disagree, they are not contradicting each other — they are answering different questions. Read them together.
None of the three is a diagnosis. They are screening tools that tell you whether a conversation with a doctor is worth having.

What This Number Cannot Do

The WHO cut-offs were derived largely from European populations. People of South Asian descent tend to carry visceral fat at lower thresholds, and several bodies recommend stricter cut-offs for them.
It does not apply to children or adolescents, whose proportions change with growth.
Pregnancy makes it meaningless, and it stays unreliable for several months afterwards.
Very muscular people can have a narrow waist and narrow hips, giving a high ratio with little fat anywhere. The number does not know the difference.
Bloating, a large meal or the menstrual cycle can each move the waist by two centimetres, which is a whole band's worth of movement.
A single reading means little. A trend over months, measured the same way each time, means something.

Worked Examples

Including the case where the ratio hides the risk

Female, waist 82 cm, hips 100 cm

Ratio = 82 ÷ 100 = 0.82
Female bands: low under 0.80, moderate 0.80-0.85, high from 0.85
Waist alone: 82 cm is over the 80 cm mark, under 88

0.82 — moderate, and the waist agrees

Female, waist 95 cm, hips 118 cm

Ratio = 95 ÷ 118 = 0.81 → moderate band
But 95 cm of waist is past the 88 cm 'substantially increased' line
The wide hips have flattered the ratio

0.81 looks fine; the waist says otherwise

Frequently Asked Questions

What is a healthy waist-to-hip ratio?

Under the WHO thresholds, below 0.85 for women and below 0.90 for men. The commonly used three-band reading puts women under 0.80 and men under 0.90 in the low band, with high risk from 0.85 and 1.00 respectively. These are screening cut-offs, not diagnoses.

Where exactly do I measure my waist?

Midway between the bottom of your lowest rib and the top of your hip bone, which is usually a little above the navel. Measuring at the navel — or worse, where your trousers sit — is the most common mistake and can shift the result by a whole band. Stand up, breathe out normally, and keep the tape snug without digging in.

Is waist-to-hip ratio better than BMI?

For predicting cardiovascular risk, several large studies have found waist-based measures do better than BMI, because BMI cannot tell where the weight sits or whether it is muscle. But they answer different questions and are generally read together rather than one instead of the other.

How is this different from waist-to-height ratio?

Waist-to-height divides your waist by your height and asks how much abdominal fat you carry for your size — the rule of thumb is to keep your waist under half your height. Waist-to-hip divides your waist by your hips and asks how your fat is distributed. Different denominators, different questions.

Can the ratio look fine while I am still at risk?

Yes, and it is the known weakness of the measure. Wide hips enlarge the denominator and flatter the result, so someone can hold a waist past the WHO's high-risk circumference and still return a reassuring ratio. That is why this page shows the waist measurement on its own, and why you should take that figure seriously when the two disagree.

What does apple or pear shape mean?

Apple describes fat carried mainly around the middle, which is what a higher ratio reflects; pear describes fat carried mainly on the hips and thighs. It is a shorthand for distribution, not a body type you are stuck with, and the abdominal component is the one that responds most readily to changes in activity and diet.