fWHR Calculator – Measure Golden Face Ratio, Width and Height

This facial width-to-height ratio (fWHR) calculator is used to measure and analyze facial proportions and find golden face ratio.

fWHR Calculator

Bizygomatic Width (mm)	Upper Facial Height (mm)	fWHR
130	65	2.00
140	80	1.75
135	70	1.93
125	75	1.67
145	72	2.01
150	78	1.92
120	65	1.85
155	82	1.89
138	76	1.82
160	85	1.88
128	70	1.83
142	74	1.92
135	68	1.98
147	80	1.84
125	73	1.71

fWHR Calculation Formula

The formula for measuring fWHR is straightforward:

fWHR = Bizygomatic Width / Upper Facial Height

Where:

• Bizygomatic Width is the distance between the left and right cheekbones (zygomas)
• Upper Facial Height is the distance from the upper lip to the brow

A face with a bizygomatic width of 140mm and an upper facial height of 70mm:

fWHR = 140mm / 70mm = 2.0

This calculation yields an fWHR of 2.0, indicating that the face is twice as wide as it is tall (in the measured region).

How to Measure fWHR?

• Obtain a front-facing photograph with a neutral expression.
• Identify key facial landmarks:
  • Cheekbones (zygomas)
  • Upper lip
  • Brow (eyebrow height)
• Measure bizygomatic width.
• Measure upper facial height.
• Apply the fWHR formula.

• Bizygomatic width: 135 pixels
• Upper facial height: 90 pixels

fWHR = 135 pixels / 90 pixels = 1.5

What is an Ideal fWHR?

• Higher fWHR (>2.0): Often linked to perceived dominance, aggression, and leadership potential.
• Lower fWHR (<1.8): Sometimes associated with perceived trustworthiness and cooperation.

A political candidate with an fWHR of 2.2 might be perceived as more dominant, potentially influencing voter impressions.

What is the Average fWHR Ratio?

Generally, research indicates:

• Male average: Approximately 1.8 – 2.0
• Female average: Slightly lower, around 1.7 – 1.9

These figures can fluctuate based on factors such as:

• Ethnicity
• Age
• Sample size
• Measurement techniques

A study of 100 young adult males might find an average fWHR of 1.92, while a similar study in a different population could yield an average of 1.85.

References

• Evolution and Human Behavior, 33(6), 623-627. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1090513812000645
• Evidence from meta-analyses of the facial width-to-height ratio as an evolved cue of threat. PloS one, 10(7), e0132726. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0132726
• A meta-analysis. PLoS One, 10(4), e0122637. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0122637

Related Tools: