Measure FWHR, midface ratio, eye spacing, and 8 other key facial ratios. 478 landmarks, processed in your browser.
Upload a photo
Drag and drop or click to browse
JPG, PNG up to 10MB
Your photo never leaves your device
Facial ratios are mathematical relationships between specific landmarks on the face. They come from two distinct traditions: aesthetic canon (the classical proportional ideals codified by Polykleitos, Vitruvius, and modern cosmetic surgeons) and quantitative research metrics (the fWHR family in psychology, the Farkas anthropometric framework in surgery). Both traditions are captured in the 11 ratios our calculator computes.
Real faces rarely match all 11 ideals — most attractive faces match 5–7 closely, with the others falling within typical population ranges. The ratios are useful for understanding your specific proportions and what changes (if any) you might want, not as a universal beauty test.
Hover any ratio in your results above to highlight it on the photo overlay. Below is the full reference for what each ratio measures and means.
Formula: bizygomatic width ÷ midface height (brows to nose base)
A research-derived metric studied for its links to perceived dominance, aggression, and athleticism — not aesthetic harmony. Typical adult range is 1.6 to 2.15. Men tend to score higher on average than women.
Formula: total face height ÷ face width
Determines overall face shape elongation. Below 1.2 trends toward round; above 1.5 trends toward oblong. The classical 'golden ratio' face targets 1.618.
Formula: jaw width ÷ cheekbone width
Lower values produce a heart-shaped or tapered face; values closer to 1.0 produce a square jaw. Sex-typical ranges differ — men's jaws are typically wider relative to cheeks.
Formula: inner eye distance ÷ face width
Affects perceived eye spacing. Lower values produce close-set eyes; higher values produce wide-set eyes. Used in optical measurements for glasses fitting.
Formula: inner eye distance ÷ eye width
The classical 'one-eye gap' rule — the distance between your eyes should equal the width of one eye. Part of the facial fifths framework where the face divides into five equal vertical sections of one eye-width each.
Formula: midface height (brow to nose base) ÷ total face height
A compact midface is associated with youthful, balanced proportions. Midface ratio increases with age as the upper face lengthens (descent of the midface and brow), making this ratio one of the most commonly cited markers of facial aging.
Formula: lower face (nose base to chin) ÷ total face height
The lower third of the face should be roughly equal to the upper and middle thirds (the 'thirds rule'). Lower thirds outside this range are associated with chin or jaw asymmetry — common targets for genioplasty or filler.
Formula: mouth width ÷ face width
Determines if your mouth reads as proportionate. Below 0.38 the mouth appears small relative to the face; above 0.45 it appears wide. Lipstick application and lip fillers can shift the visual perception subtly.
Formula: nose width (alar) ÷ mouth width
The nose should be roughly two-thirds the width of the mouth in classical canon. Ratios outside this range are common targets in rhinoplasty consultations. Population variation is high.
Formula: nose length (bridge to tip) ÷ total face height
Determines nose prominence relative to face length. Higher values produce a longer nose silhouette; lower values a shorter, more upturned profile. Strongly influenced by ethnicity — population norms vary.
Formula: total lip height ÷ mouth width
Indicates overall lip fullness. Below 0.25 lips read as thin; above 0.40 they read as full. Naturally varies with age (lips thin over time) and is the primary target ratio for lip filler planning.
fWHR is one of the most studied facial metrics in psychology research. It was introduced by Carre and McCormick in 2008, who measured the ratio in professional hockey players and found a correlation with on-ice aggression. Subsequent studies have linked higher fWHR to perceived dominance, risk-taking, athletic performance, and CEO success — though many findings have shown replication issues.
Key fWHR facts
fWHR is shaped by bizygomatic width and masseter volume — both of which can shift over time. For lifestyle and exercise-based interventions, see our guide on how to improve your jawline naturally.
The midface ratio compares the height of your midface — the vertical span from your brow line down to the base of your nose — against your total face height. It's one of the most cited markers of facial aging and one of the most common targets for non-surgical interventions like dermal fillers.
How it changes with age
Midface ratio increases as the face ages. The malar fat pads descend, the upper jaw resorbs, and the cheekbone region flattens — all of which lengthen the apparent midface relative to the total face. This is one reason youthful faces appear more 'compact' in the upper half.
How to measure it manually
Measure midface height (brow line to base of nose) and total face height (hairline to chin tip). Divide the first by the second. For example: midface 6.6 cm ÷ total 22 cm = 0.30 — within the 0.30–0.35 ideal range.
Quick reference: midface ratio ranges
Different midface ratios pair with different face shapes — for styling implications by shape, see our face shape hairstyle guide.
The overall score is the average across all 11 ratios. Most attractive faces don't score above 90 — perfect alignment across every ratio is statistically rare and not a precondition for beauty.
85–100 — Strong harmony
Most ratios fall within the classical aesthetic ranges. Faces in this range read as well-proportioned across multiple metrics.
75–84 — Balanced
Several ratios are in the ideal range, others fall just outside. Typical of faces commonly perceived as attractive — perfect alignment across all 11 ratios is rare.
65–74 — Mixed
Some ratios match aesthetic ideals while others differ noticeably. Often reflects a distinct face shape (e.g. heart, oblong) where some ratios trade off against others.
Below 65 — Distinctive
Most ratios fall outside the aesthetic ideal ranges. This is purely a measure of distance from classical canon — many faces in this range are considered unique, attractive, or culturally specific in ways the ratios don't capture.
Front-facing, eye-level camera
Tilted angles distort vertical ratios — particularly midface, lower third, and facial index. Hold the camera at eye level and roughly arm's length away.
Neutral expression, lips relaxed
Smiling widens the lower face and shortens apparent height. Pursed or pressed lips alter lip fullness ratio. A relaxed neutral expression gives the most stable readings.
Hair pulled back
Hair covering the hairline or jaw outline blocks landmark detection. Tie hair back so the full face contour is visible.
Avoid wide-angle selfies
Phone selfie cameras distort proportions, especially the nose and forehead. Use a back camera held at arm's length, or have someone else take the photo from a few feet away.
Even, soft lighting
Side lighting creates shadows that shift apparent feature edges. Diffused front lighting (window or soft box) gives the cleanest landmark detection.
The typical adult range is 1.6 to 2.15, with men averaging slightly higher than women. The 1.8 to 2.0 range is most commonly cited as 'ideal' in research contexts, but FWHR is studied for its associations with perceived dominance, aggression, and athletic performance — not aesthetic attractiveness. A high or low FWHR isn't 'better' or 'worse'; it carries different social perceptions.
Most aesthetic frameworks place the ideal midface ratio between 0.30 and 0.35 — meaning the midface (brow line to nose base) makes up about 30 to 35 percent of total face height. Higher ratios (longer midface) are associated with apparent aging and male-typical structures; lower ratios with youthful, female-typical structures. Ratios below 0.28 or above 0.40 are unusual and often correspond to specific face shapes.
You need two measurements: midface height (from the brow line, between your eyebrows, down to the base of your nose where it meets your upper lip) and total face height (from the center of your hairline straight down to the tip of your chin). Divide midface height by total face height. For example, if your midface measures 6.6 cm and your total face height is 22 cm, your midface ratio is 0.30 — within the ideal range. The tool above does this automatically with sub-millimeter accuracy.
It depends on the ratio. fWHR has a substantial research base in psychology (Carre & McCormick, 2008 onward) linking it to perceived behavior, though some findings have replication issues. Facial anthropometric ratios (Farkas's framework) are well-established in surgical planning. The 'aesthetic ideal' ranges, however, are largely derived from cosmetic surgery literature and Western beauty standards, and have weaker empirical support as universal beauty rules. Use the ratios as one descriptive lens, not a verdict.
Yes — soft tissue ratios shift noticeably. Midface ratio typically increases with age (the midface lengthens as fat pads descend and the upper jaw resorbs). Lip fullness ratio decreases (lips thin). Lower third ratio decreases as the chin loses projection. Skeletal ratios (face width, jaw width, eye spacing) remain stable after the early 20s. The biggest visible age-related changes are in the midface and lower face soft tissues.
They measure different things. The golden ratio in facial analysis usually refers to face length divided by face width, with a target of 1.618 (phi). FWHR is bizygomatic width divided by upper facial height (top eyelid to upper lip), with a typical range of 1.6 to 2.15 and no single 'ideal'. Golden ratio research focuses on aesthetic harmony; fWHR research focuses on perceived dominance and behavior.
Soft tissue ratios respond to interventions: weight changes shift face width, fillers add lower-face height (chin) or balance midface volume, lip filler shifts lip fullness ratio, retinoids and good skin care preserve youthful proportions. Skeletal ratios (face width, jaw width, eye spacing, IPD) cannot be changed without surgery. Hairstyle, grooming, and makeup change the visual reading of all ratios significantly — often more than the underlying measurements.
No. The score measures distance from classical Western aesthetic canon, not attractiveness. Many faces rated as highly attractive in research deviate from these ratios — particularly faces from non-European populations whose ratios reflect different ancestral norms. The ratios are useful for understanding your specific proportions and what changes (if any) you might want, but they aren't a universal beauty test.