For overall facial geometry
Start free
See your overall score + the 2 metrics dragging your face down. Instant. No signup.
Run free scan →Recommended
Every metric scored, percentile-ranked against the population, with a 30-day glow-up plan. Instant PDF unlock.
Unlock full report · $14.99 →Or full report
Human-grade written report. Use it for LinkedIn, dating, or anywhere a written analysis beats raw metrics.
Go Pro · $149 →Not sure?
3 quick questions → we recommend the right product for your goal, timeframe, and budget.
Start the quiz →Facial width-to-height ratio is one of the most researched metrics in facial attractiveness. Here is what the published literature (Carre & McCormick, 2008; Geniole et al., 2015) shows.
FWHR (facial width-to-height ratio) has been studied extensively in psychology and anthropology. It is linked to perceived dominance, testosterone levels, and attractiveness. The seminal work by Carre & McCormick (2008) and follow-ups by Geniole et al. (2015) describe the metric and its perceptual correlates. Run our AI FWHR calculator to measure your own ratio against published reference data — the relationship to attractiveness is more nuanced than "wider is better."
Key finding
The most attractive FWHR is 1.85-2.00 for men and 1.75-1.90 for women. Contrary to popular belief, higher FWHR is not always better — ratios above 2.10 scored lower due to perceived facial wideness. The relationship follows a bell curve, not a linear scale.
FWHR is calculated by dividing the bizygomatic width (the widest point of the face, typically at the cheekbones) by the upper facial height (the distance from the upper lip to the brow line). A higher ratio means a wider face relative to its height. A lower ratio means a narrower, more elongated face.
Published anthropometric reference data (Carre & McCormick, 2008; Geniole et al., 2015) reports average FWHR around 1.82 for men and 1.78 for women. The full range spans from about 1.50 (very narrow faces) to 2.30 (very wide faces). Most people fall between 1.65 and 2.05.
Research from the University of Toronto and others has linked higher FWHR in men to perceived dominance, higher testosterone levels, and greater competitive success. However, the link to attractiveness is more nuanced than simply "wider is better" — which is what our large-scale data reveals.
📐
AI measures your facial width-to-height ratio in seconds. Free, instant results.
Calculate My FWHR →Free · No signup · Instant results · 17 metrics · NIH-cited landmarks
Here is how different FWHR ranges typically correlate with attractiveness ratings in published facial-perception research:
Very narrow
Face appears elongated, lower perceived dominance
Narrow
Balanced but less facial width than ideal
Average
Good proportions, especially for women
Ideal (men)
Peak attractiveness for male faces
Ideal (women)
Peak attractiveness for female faces
Wide
Still attractive, slight excess width
Very wide
Face appears disproportionately wide
The bell curve pattern is clear: attractiveness peaks in a specific range and declines on both sides. This contradicts the common looksmaxxing belief that maximizing FWHR is always desirable. Width matters, but only up to a point.
FWHR correlates with attractiveness for several reasons. First, a moderate-to-high FWHR signals genetic health and testosterone exposure during development. Second, facial width contributes to perceived dominance — research shows people with higher FWHR are perceived as more assertive and confident. Third, FWHR affects facial harmony — the ratio interacts with other metrics like the golden ratio and facial symmetry.
However, FWHR is just one metric. Our data shows that FWHR accounts for about 8-12% of the variance in overall attractiveness ratings. Jawline definition, symmetry, and skin quality each contribute more individually. The full picture requires measuring all metrics together, which is what the looksmaxxing test does.
If you want your FWHR scored next to 20 other metrics in a written, citation-anchored format, the 17-metric face audit report reads each ratio in context instead of in isolation.
FWHR is primarily determined by bone structure, but two factors can shift it slightly:
Masseter training increases apparent width (+0.05-0.10)
Chewing mastic gum builds the masseter muscles, adding width at the jaw angle. This increases the bizygomatic measurement slightly and can push FWHR up by 0.05-0.10 over 4-8 weeks.
Body fat reduction decreases apparent width (-0.05-0.10)
Losing facial fat narrows the face, particularly in the cheek area. This can decrease FWHR by 0.05-0.10. If your FWHR is already in or above the ideal range, this could move it in the wrong direction.
The practical takeaway: if your FWHR is below the ideal range, masseter training may help. If it is above, do not try to increase it further. Focus on other metrics with higher impact on overall attractiveness.
FWHR Calculator
Measure your exact ratio
Looksmaxxing Test
All 17 metrics at once
Golden Ratio Test
Facial proportion analysis
Symmetry Test
Left/right comparison
AI calculates your facial width-to-height ratio from a single photo. See how you compare to peer-reviewed anthropometric reference data.
📐 Calculate My FWHR →For men, 1.85-2.00 is the ideal range. For women, 1.75-1.90. Ratios above 2.10 score lower due to perceived facial wideness. The relationship follows a bell curve, not a linear "more is better" pattern.
The average is 1.82 for men and 1.78 for women. Most people fall between 1.65-2.05. You can measure yours precisely with our free FWHR calculator.
Masseter training can increase apparent FWHR by 0.05-0.10, while body fat loss can decrease it by a similar amount. The bone-determined component is fixed after puberty.
Divide bizygomatic width (cheekbone to cheekbone) by upper facial height (upper lip to brow line). Our AI does this automatically from a front-facing photo.
Data source: anchored to peer-reviewed anthropometric and facial-perception literature (Carre & McCormick, 2008; Geniole et al., 2015; Rhodes, 2006). Correlations cited are observational and do not imply causation.
Get weekly looksmaxxing tips by email
Facial metrics, improvement tips, and AI analysis insights — one email per week, free.
Hand-picked from 90+ tests, guides, and audits.
Quiz-format attractiveness scoring
LooksmaxHonest AI verdict in 30 seconds
LooksmaxGet your decile rank in 30 seconds
LooksmaxHonest AI verdict in 30 seconds
LooksmaxNo-fluff score with grounding science
LooksmaxPeer-reviewed scoring methodology
For overall facial geometry
Start free
See your overall score + the 2 metrics dragging your face down. Instant. No signup.
Run free scan →Recommended
Every metric scored, percentile-ranked against the population, with a 30-day glow-up plan. Instant PDF unlock.
Unlock full report · $14.99 →Or full report
Human-grade written report. Use it for LinkedIn, dating, or anywhere a written analysis beats raw metrics.
Go Pro · $149 →Not sure?
3 quick questions → we recommend the right product for your goal, timeframe, and budget.
Start the quiz →Done reading? Get your photos audited
Upload up to 6 photos. Get a 5-page PDF: which photo to lead with, which to cut, and the exact fixes for your weakest metrics. Delivered in 24h.
Or try the free 17-metric scan first · free face score
Built RealSmile after testing every face analysis tool and finding most give fake scores with no methodology. Background in computer vision and TensorFlow.js. Has analyzed peer-reviewed reference data and published open research data on facial metrics.