Skip to main content

Age-Grading Calculator

Age-adjusted performance comparison (WMA 2015)

Race time

60.1 %

Locally competitive

Your performance corresponds to 60.1% of the expected world-class performance for your age.

Performance across ages

Almost everyone slows down over the years — that is normal and has nothing to do with effort. Age grading takes that effect out.

The result is a percentage: how close your time is to what is possible at your age and sex. It lets a 60-year-old compare directly with a 25-year-old.

How it is calculated

Age grading in % = (open-class world standard / age factor) / your time × 100. The age factor is 1.0 up to 35 and declines afterwards: men 1 − 0.005 × x − 0.00015 × x², women 1 − 0.0045 × x − 0.00012 × x², with x = age − 35.

The factor approximates the World Masters Athletics tables, which record for every age how much slower the world's best of that age are — so a 45:00 at 60 becomes comparable with a 45:00 at 25.

Example: male, 40 years, 10 km in 45:00 = 2700 s. Open standard for 10 km = 1577 s (26:17). x = 5, factor = 1 − 0.025 − 0.00375 = 0.971. Age standard = 1577 / 0.971 = 1624 s. Age grading = 1624 / 2700 × 100 = 60.1 %.

The rating: from 90 % world class, from 80 % national class, from 70 % regional class, from 60 % locally competitive, from 50 % good.

To calculate an age-graded performance you get an approximation here; the official tables differ by one to two percentage points depending on age.

How to read the percentage

Higher is stronger. Around 60 percent is already solid for a committed recreational runner; 80 percent and above sits at regional elite level.

The nice side effect: even as your times get slower with age, your age grade can rise. That is often the more honest feedback.

Frequently asked questions

Where do the reference values come from?
From the tables of the world masters athletics association, which hold a benchmark performance for every age group and distance.
From what age is this worthwhile?
For anyone. Below 30 the factor sits close to one, so little changes. It gets interesting from around 40.
Does it apply to triathlon?
The method comes from running and is designed for running distances. There is no comparably established table for triathlon.