Discover your somatotype — ectomorph, mesomorph, or endomorph — using bone-frame measurements and get personalized training and diet strategies for your body type.
This body type calculator estimates whether you're primarily an ectomorph (lean, narrow frame, fast metabolism), a mesomorph (athletic, broad shoulders, muscular), or an endomorph (wider frame, higher body-fat tendency, slower metabolism), or a blend of two types. You'll enter measurements — typically wrist circumference, ankle circumference, and body weight — or answer a structured questionnaire about shoulder-to-waist ratio, bone structure, and fat distribution tendencies. The calculator returns your dominant somatotype and a brief description of its typical characteristics. Because somatotypes exist on a spectrum rather than in three tidy boxes, many people fall between categories. This tool is educational and exploratory, not clinical. It won't diagnose a metabolic condition or replace professional fitness assessment — it's a starting framework for personalizing your approach to training and eating. As always, consult a healthcare provider for individualized medical or dietary advice.
Enter your height, weight, wrist circumference, and ankle circumference (or complete the body-shape questionnaire if measurements aren't available), then tap calculate. Your result shows your dominant somatotype — ectomorph, mesomorph, or endomorph — plus a percentage blend if you show significant traits of two types. An ectomorph result means a naturally lean, narrow build with difficulty gaining mass; mesomorph indicates an athletic frame that responds well to both training and diet change; endomorph points to a stockier, softer build with a tendency to store fat more readily. Most people land somewhere in the middle — a 60/40 ectomorph-mesomorph blend is far more common than a pure type. Use your result as a conversation-starter for adjusting training volume or macro ratios, not as a fixed identity.
Somatotype calculators use bone width relative to height and body weight as proxies for skeletal frame and natural muscle/fat distribution. A common bone-frame method uses wrist circumference:
| Sex | Small Frame (Ectomorph) | Medium Frame (Mesomorph) | Large Frame (Endomorph) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Men | < 0.100 | 0.100 – 0.110 | > 0.110 |
The calculator combines this with height-to-weight ratio and ankle circumference to produce a dominant somatotype score. Where questionnaires are used instead, the algorithm weights answers about shoulder breadth, fat-gain patterns, and muscle-gain ease into the same three-category output.
When measuring, be sure to stand straight with arms to the side. Make sure the tape is snug against the body, but not too tight such that it compresses the body (making the measurement inaccurate).
The circumference measured around the chest over the fullest part of the breasts, while wearing a properly fitted bra.
The smallest circumference measured around the natural waist, just above the belly button.
The circumference of the upper swell of the hip over the pelvic region. It is around 7 inches (18 cm) below the natural waist.
The largest circumference measured around the hips over the largest part of the buttocks.
The three somatotypes describe distinct body structure and metabolic tendencies.
Narrow shoulders, small wrists, a fast metabolism, and difficulty adding both fat and muscle. Ectomorphs often need higher caloric surpluses and more frequent training stimulus to build mass.
Broader shoulders relative to hips, lower natural body fat, and faster muscle response to resistance training — the body type most people consider "naturally athletic."
Wider frames, higher natural body fat percentages, and a tendency to store energy efficiently. Can build strength readily but need more deliberate effort to manage body fat through diet and cardio.
These descriptions capture tendencies, not ceilings — an endomorph who trains consistently and manages nutrition can absolutely achieve a lean, muscular physique; the path just requires different tools than a natural mesomorph's.
Your somatotype shapes how your body responds to different training stimuli, which is why cookie-cutter programs don't produce equal results.
🏃 Ectomorphs: Benefit from lower training frequency and volume with heavier loads (3–4 days per week of compound movements), prioritizing recovery between sessions because their slower recovery capacity and leaner frames are prone to overtraining.
💪 Mesomorphs: The most adaptable — respond well to almost any periodized program, whether hypertrophy-focused or strength-focused, and can handle higher training volumes.
🧸 Endomorphs: Do best combining resistance training with sustained moderate-intensity cardio — resistance work preserves and builds muscle mass while cardio addresses the higher tendency to store fat. ACSM guidelines recommend 150–300 minutes of moderate-intensity aerobic activity per week.
Nutrition strategy differs meaningfully across somatotypes.
🏃 Ectomorphs: Typically need a higher caloric intake and benefit from a carbohydrate-forward diet (50–60% of calories) because carbs are the most efficient fuel for building mass and supporting intense training.
💪 Mesomorphs: Flexible — a balanced split roughly aligned with USDA AMDR guidance (45–65% carbs, 10–35% protein, 20–35% fat) keeps energy high and muscle fueled without excess fat accumulation.
🧸 Endomorphs: Tend to benefit from lower-carbohydrate approaches — shifting carbs to the lower end of the AMDR range (45–50%) while keeping protein higher (25–30%). Nutrient timing matters: front-loading carbohydrates earlier in the day and around workouts can improve fat oxidation.
In the fashion industry, body shapes are often categorized into four classes.
Bust and hips are well-balanced with a narrow waist. Considered the most balanced female shape.
Hips are wider than bust. Weight tends to accumulate below the waist.
Bust is larger than hips with less defined waist. Weight tends to accumulate above the waist.
Bust, waist, and hips are similar in circumference. Weight distribution is even throughout the body.
Did you know? A study of more than 6,000 women conducted at North Carolina State University in 2005 revealed that 46% of women were banana-shaped; just over 20% were pear-shaped; just under 14% were apple-shaped; and only 8% were hourglass-shaped.
The female body shapes are based on societal standards that are subjective and different in different cultures. The algorithm used in this calculator is based on a study published in the International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology, which breaks down body shapes into 7 categories. Some body shapes may not fit into any of the shapes listed below.
| Body Shape | Classification Rule |
|---|---|
| ⌛ Hourglass | (bust − hips) ≤ 1" AND (hips − bust) < 3.6" AND (bust − waist) ≥ 9" OR (hips − waist) ≥ 10" |
| ⌛ Bottom Hourglass | (hips − bust) ≥ 3.6" AND (hips − bust) < 10" AND (hips − waist) ≥ 9" AND (high hip/waist) < 1.193 |
| ⌛ Top Hourglass | (bust − hips) > 1" AND (bust − hips) < 10" AND (bust − waist) ≥ 9" |
| 🥄 Spoon | (hips − bust) > 2" AND (hips − waist) ≥ 7" AND (high hip/waist) ≥ 1.193 |
| 🔺 Triangle | (hips − bust) ≥ 3.6" AND (hips − waist) < 9" |
| 🔻 Inverted Triangle | (bust − hips) ≥ 3.6" AND (bust − waist) < 9" |
| 🟫 Rectangle | (hips − bust) < 3.6" AND (bust − hips) < 3.6" AND (bust − waist) < 9" AND (hips − waist) < 10" |
Waist-hip ratio (WHR) is defined as the ratio of waist circumference to hip circumference. The value is calculated by dividing waist measurement by hip measurement. A person with a 34" waist and 40" hip would have a WHR of 0.85.
Research has shown that people with more weight around their waist ("apple-shaped" bodies) are at higher risk than those with more weight around their hips ("pear-shaped" bodies). According to the NIDDK, women with WHRs above 0.8 and men with WHRs above 1.0 have higher health risks.
Males: WHR above 0.90
Females: WHR above 0.85
Females with WHRs between 0.70-0.79 have higher pregnancy rates. Men with WHRs around 0.9 are more fertile and healthier.
WHR has been found to be more effective than both waist circumference and BMI for predicting mortality in people above age 75 and a better predictor of cardiovascular disease. A study found that if obesity were re-defined based on WHR rather than BMI, the proportion categorized as at risk of heart attack would increase three times.
This is the honest caveat every body type calculator should acknowledge: somatotype theory as Sheldon originally formulated it — including his attempts to link physique to personality and temperament — is largely discredited. The underlying idea that humans vary in skeletal structure, muscle-building capacity, and fat-storage tendency has solid biological basis; the rigid three-type taxonomy and the idea of fixed "types" is the oversimplification. Modern exercise science acknowledges a spectrum of phenotypic variation driven by genetics, hormonal profiles, and metabolic rate — all of which the somatotype labels loosely approximate. A review in the Journal of Sports Sciences noted that somatotype assessments still appear in athlete profiling, particularly in sports where body composition has performance implications. The practical takeaway: treat your somatotype result as a rough useful heuristic, not a biological destiny or a precise scientific classification.
Your skeletal frame — bone width, height, shoulder-to-hip ratio — is genetically determined and doesn't change. What does change, sometimes dramatically, is body composition: muscle mass, body fat percentage, and fat distribution. An endomorph who builds significant lean mass and loses body fat may look much closer to a mesomorph phenotypically, even though the underlying frame is the same. An ectomorph who trains hard for years and adds meaningful muscle shifts their physique toward a leaner mesomorphic appearance. So the short answer is: your somatotype category on paper is fairly fixed, but how that body looks and performs can change substantially with consistent training and nutrition. The calculator's value isn't labeling you permanently — it's helping you understand your starting tendencies so you can choose strategies that work with your biology rather than constantly fighting it.
Somatotype estimation is most accurate when wrist and ankle circumference are measured carefully with a flexible tape — these are the primary bone-width proxies. The ratio of shoulder width to waist width is another strong indicator; broader shoulders relative to a narrow waist typically signals mesomorphic or ectomorphic characteristics, while a more uniform shoulder-to-hip ratio points endomorphic. Body weight at a given height matters because it reflects fat and muscle relative to frame. Age affects apparent type: as people age and activity declines, endomorphic characteristics tend to become more prominent regardless of original somatotype, because muscle loss and fat gain shift the visual profile. The calculator works best on adults in a typical weight range — significant obesity or extreme athletic development can produce classification anomalies because those physiques fall outside the range the original somatotype framework was calibrated against.
Tyler is a 22-year-old student in Madison, Wisconsin — 6'1", 155 lb with a 6.5-inch wrist (frame ratio ≈ 0.088, well into ectomorphic range). He's been frustrated that his training produces little visible muscle gain. His body type result: dominant ectomorph. With that context, he shifts from 4-day high-volume programming to 3-day full-body compound lifting with a deliberate 400-calorie daily surplus — carb-forward at 55% of calories. Within 12 weeks he gains 8 lb and begins to see structural change for the first time.
Sandra is a 40-year-old in Phoenix, Arizona — 5'5", 175 lb with a 6.8-inch wrist and ankle. Her result is a dominant endomorph with moderate mesomorph traits. Rather than defaulting to the same low-calorie approach she's tried before, she restructures: resistance training 3x per week to preserve lean mass, moderate-intensity cardio 3x per week, and protein raised to 160g/day (approximately 1.6 g/kg lean mass). Her carbs are front-loaded to morning and pre-workout. Over 16 weeks she loses 14 lb of fat while strength improves — the combination of understanding her somatotype and adjusting her approach rather than working harder at the wrong strategy.
Measure wrist circumference at the smallest point just distal to the wrist bones for the most accurate frame estimate; a floppy cloth tape works better than a rigid ruler.
Don't treat your somatotype as a fixed identity — use it as a starting hypothesis and update based on how your body actually responds over 8–12 weeks of consistent training.
Ectomorphs: focus on progressive overload and sleep. Undereating and overtraining are your two biggest enemies for building mass.
Endomorphs: don't eliminate carbs entirely — shift them toward the workout window and focus on total calorie control rather than carb phobia.
Most people are blends. If the calculator returns a 55/45 mesomorph-endomorph, treat both sides of that spectrum as relevant, not just the dominant one.
Reassess after major body composition changes — the measurements that define your somatotype look may shift meaningfully after losing 20+ pounds or gaining significant muscle.
Your body type is determined by skeletal frame size, natural muscle distribution, and fat-storage tendencies. The calculator uses wrist and ankle circumference relative to height and weight to estimate which somatotype best describes your physique. Many people are a blend of two types rather than a pure category.
Body type calculators are reasonable starting frameworks but not precise scientific instruments. Measurement-based tools (wrist and ankle circumference) are more reliable than questionnaire-only approaches. The somatotype framework captures real variation in body structure, though the original three-category taxonomy is a simplification of a true biological spectrum.
Your skeletal frame is fixed, but body composition — muscle mass and body fat — can change substantially with training and diet. An endomorph can achieve a lean, muscular physique with consistent effort; the approach just differs from that of a natural mesomorph.
Endomorphs typically benefit from lower-carbohydrate, higher-protein eating patterns — keeping carbohydrates at the lower end of the USDA AMDR range (around 45%) and protein toward 25–30% of calories. Front-loading carbs around workouts rather than in the evening can also improve fat oxidation over time.
Not exactly. Ectomorph describes a narrow skeletal frame and low natural body fat, but many ectomorphs have low muscle mass and may be classified as "skinny-fat" with normal or low weight but poor body composition. Body type is about structural tendencies, not just scale weight.
Mesomorphs respond well to most training styles and adapt quickly to new stimuli. Periodized programs alternating between hypertrophy phases (8–12 reps) and strength phases (4–6 reps) tend to produce the best long-term results. ACSM guidelines recommend progressive overload principles regardless of somatotype.
Yes, indirectly. Endomorphs typically have a higher fat-to-muscle ratio, which reduces resting metabolic rate (BMR) since fat tissue burns fewer calories than muscle. Ectomorphs tend to have faster metabolisms partly due to lean body composition and partly due to genetic variation in thermogenesis. Using a BMR Calculator alongside your somatotype gives you a clearer metabolic picture.
The core observation — that people vary in skeletal frame, muscle-building capacity, and fat-distribution tendencies — is biologically valid. The rigid three-type taxonomy Sheldon proposed is considered an oversimplification by modern exercise science. It's useful as a practical heuristic for personalizing training and nutrition, not as a precise biological classification.
Brief disclaimer: This calculator provides educational somatotype estimates based on body measurements and is intended for exploratory and fitness-planning purposes only. Somatotype theory as originally formulated is considered an oversimplification by modern exercise science. Results are not clinical diagnoses and should not replace professional fitness or medical assessment. Consult a healthcare provider or certified fitness professional for personalized training and nutrition guidance.