Max Heart Rate Formulas: Which One Is Most Accurate for Your Age?
The Problem With 220 − Age
The 220 − age formula has a standard deviation of ±10–12 bpm. For a 40-year-old with an estimated MHR of 180, their actual MHR could be 168–192. That’s a 24 bpm range — enough to put their Zone 4 boundary in Zone 3 or Zone 5 depending on direction.
Tanaka Formula: Better for Older Adults
Tanaka (2001): MHR = 208 − 0.7 × age. Derived from a meta-analysis of 351 studies (18,712 subjects). More accurate than 220-age, especially for people over 40. A 60-year-old gets 166 bpm by Tanaka vs 160 bpm by 220-age — the difference matters for zone calculations.
Gellish Formula: Best for Fitness-Tracked Individuals
Gellish (2007): MHR = 207 − 0.7 × age. Very similar to Tanaka, developed specifically for healthy adults using maximal exercise testing. More accurate for trained individuals than 220-age.
True Maximum Heart Rate Testing
For the most accurate zones, you need an actual MHR test: maximal effort on a treadmill or cycling ergometer until you cannot maintain pace. Most gyms with supervised fitness assessment services offer this. If your training is serious (marathon prep, triathlon), a tested MHR is worth the effort.
Frequently Asked Questions
Calculate your heart rate zones
Open Heart Rate Zones Calculator — see zones based on multiple MHR formulas.
Open Heart Rate Zones