Toolkit/Body
03 / Body

Body Fat Estimator

Navy tape, BMI-based and skinfold methods side by side, each with its published error range. Consistency matters more than picking the "true" one.

The Stat Method INSTRUMENTLIVE IN BROWSERNO ACCOUNT · INPUTS STAY LOCAL
Before you calculate
  1. 01Measure with a flexible tape, relaxed, at the same time of day each time.
  2. 02Neck below the larynx; waist at the narrowest point; hip at the widest.
  3. 03Skinfolds are optional — leave them blank if you have no calipers.
What the terms mean
Navy method
Body fat estimated from neck, waist (and hip) circumference plus height.
Skinfold
Body fat estimated by pinching fat at set sites with calipers.
Deurenberg
A body-fat estimate derived from BMI, age and sex — no measuring required.
FFMI
Fat-free mass index: lean mass relative to height.
01 / RUN THE INSTRUMENTCALCULATE · CHECK · UNDERSTAND
Measurements
yrs
kg
cm
Tape measurements Navy method
cm
cm
Skinfolds optional · millimetres
mm
mm
mm

Jackson-Pollock 3-site. Leave blank if you don't have calipers.

Body fat estimate
16.4%
± 3.5

Via U.S. Navy tapeFitness range.

Category labels come from population averages and can't tell muscle from fat — a muscular person often lands in a higher band despite low body fat. There is a further limitation worth knowing: the American Medical Association's 2023 position is that BMI correlates with fat mass across a population but loses predictive power when applied to one individual, that its cut-offs derive largely from earlier generations of non-Hispanic white populations, and that it should not be used as a sole measure. Treat this as a rough screening band, not a verdict on your health.

Method comparisonAgreeing2 of 3
U.S. Navy tape16.4%
12.9%
19.9%
Tape measurements. Free and repeatable if you measure the same spots each time.
Skinfold (Jackson-Pollock)no data
Accurate in trained hands, unreliable in untrained ones.
BMI-based (Deurenberg)21.0%
16.9%
25.1%
Needs no measurement, but cannot tell muscle from fat.
Lean mass
67kg
Fat mass
13kg
FFMI
21.1
Waist:height
0.48

FFMI 21.1Above average. Waist-to-height above 0.50 is the common risk threshold and predicts cardiometabolic risk better than BMI.

Method & sources

Every body-fat method is an estimate with real error bars. The practical question is not which is true but which is repeatable — a method that is consistently three points off still tracks change correctly. Pick one, measure the same way each time, and follow the trend.

Hodgdon JA & Beckett MB, Naval Health Research Center 1984 · Deurenberg P et al. 1991 · Jackson AS & Pollock ML, Br J Nutr 1978 · Siri WE 1961 · Ashwell M & Gibson S, BMJ Open 2016

02 / READING THE RESULT

What these numbers
actually tell you.

01

Repeatability matters more than accuracy

Every method here carries an error range of three to five percentage points. A method that reads consistently three points high is still perfectly useful, because the change it reports is correct. A method you switch every month tells you nothing. Pick one, standardise the conditions, and compare only against your own previous readings.

02

Why the methods disagree

They measure different proxies. Tape measurements infer fat from where you carry circumference. Skinfolds sample subcutaneous fat at three sites. The BMI-based estimate cannot distinguish muscle from fat at all, which is why it reads high for muscular people and low for the very sedentary.

03

Treat small changes as noise

If your method carries ±3.5 points, a shift from 18.2% to 17.9% is not a result. Look for changes larger than the error range, over at least a month. And if you are guessing rather than measuring, leave the field blank in other calculators — a bad body-fat input produces worse targets than none at all.

KEEP THE TOOLS OPEN

Free, no account, nothing stored. A one-off tip helps cover hosting and keeps the site ad-light.

♦ Support The Stat Method