Waist-to-Hip Ratio (WHR) Calculator
Assess abdominal fat distribution and cardiometabolic risk pattern
Enter waist and hip circumferences (each can use cm or inches). WHR is computed instantly in your browser.Measurements
Your result
--| Sex | Low risk | Moderate risk | High risk (central obesity) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Men | < 0.90 | 0.90 – 0.99 | ≥ 1.00 |
| Women | < 0.80 | 0.80 – 0.84 | ≥ 0.85 |
Health implications
Higher WHR indicates more abdominal (visceral) fat relative to hip fat and is linked to higher risk of type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and metabolic syndrome when sustained over time.
Lower WHR (within healthy bands) generally reflects more favorable fat distribution for long-term metabolic and heart health; staying active, balanced nutrition, and sleep support healthier patterns.
Waist-to-Hip Ratio Calculator: How to Measure, Calculate, and Understand Your WHR
A single ribbon of measuring tape, wrapped twice around your body, can tell you more about your long-term health risk than the number on a bathroom scale. Here is everything to know about waist-to-hip ratio — what it measures, how to find yours, and what it actually means.
What Is Waist-to-Hip Ratio?
Waist-to-hip ratio, almost always shortened to WHR, is exactly what it sounds like: the circumference of your waist divided by the circumference of your hips. It is a simple, unitless number — something like 0.78 or 0.94 — that describes how your body stores weight in relation to your skeletal frame, rather than how much you weigh in total.
The idea behind WHR is that two people can weigh the same amount, or even have the same body mass index, and still carry that weight very differently. One person might store more fat around the abdomen and upper body — a pattern researchers call android or central fat distribution, often nicknamed the "apple shape." Another might store more fat around the hips, thighs, and buttocks — a pattern called gynoid distribution, or the "pear shape." Waist-to-hip ratio is essentially a quick proxy for telling these two patterns apart without an MRI or a DEXA scan.
Same total weight, two different fat-distribution patterns — WHR tells them apart.
WHR became a standard part of clinical and epidemiological research in the late twentieth century, largely through the work of the World Health Organization, which adopted it as one of several practical screening tools for abdominal obesity. Unlike body fat percentage, which usually requires calipers, bioelectrical impedance scales, or imaging equipment, WHR needs nothing more than a flexible tape measure and a flat surface to stand on. That accessibility is a big part of why it has remained popular in both clinics and home health tracking for decades.
What the ratio actually represents
Mathematically, WHR is a comparison of two circumferences, but physiologically it is a window into where your body prefers to store excess energy. Visceral fat — the fat that wraps around internal organs in the abdominal cavity — behaves differently from subcutaneous fat stored in the hips and thighs. Visceral fat is more metabolically active, releases more inflammatory signaling molecules, and has a stronger statistical association with cardiovascular and metabolic conditions. A higher waist-to-hip ratio is, in effect, a rough surrogate for "how much visceral fat is this person likely carrying," even though it cannot measure visceral fat directly the way a CT scan can.
It's worth being precise about what WHR is not. It is not a measure of total body fat, it is not a diagnosis, and it is not a judgment of fitness or worth. Two athletes with very different natural builds — one narrow-hipped, one wide-hipped — can both be in excellent cardiovascular health with very different WHR numbers. The ratio is simply one data point describing body shape, best read alongside other measurements rather than in isolation.
How Should I Measure My Waist and Hips?
Most of the error in a home WHR calculation doesn't come from the math — it comes from where the tape sits and how tightly it's pulled. Getting the raw measurements right is the part worth slowing down for.
What you'll need
- A flexible, non-stretch tape measure (the cloth kind used for sewing or body measurements, not a rigid metal one).
- A mirror, a willing helper, or a smartphone propped up to check the tape stays level — it's easy to let it dip lower in the back.
- Light clothing or bare skin at the measurement site. Thick sweaters, belts, and waistbands all distort the reading.
- A notepad or note-taking app, since you'll want to record numbers from at least two attempts.
Step-by-step: measuring your waist
- Stand up straight with your feet together, arms relaxed at your sides, and breathe out normally — don't suck in or puff out your stomach.
- Find your natural waist. Clinically, this is the midpoint between the bottom of your lowest rib and the top of your hip bone (the iliac crest), which for most people lands roughly level with the belly button, sometimes slightly above it.
- Wrap the tape horizontally around this point, keeping it parallel to the floor all the way around — check the back in a mirror, since the tape commonly slips downward there.
- Pull the tape until it sits snugly against the skin without compressing it. You should be able to slide one finger underneath comfortably.
- Read the measurement at the end of a normal exhale, record it to the nearest millimeter or eighth of an inch, then repeat once more to confirm consistency.
Step-by-step: measuring your hips
- Stand with your feet together, looking straight ahead, in the same relaxed posture used for the waist measurement.
- Locate the widest point of your hips and buttocks. For most people this is a few inches below the waist and roughly level with the hip joints, but the exact height varies by body shape, so look rather than assume.
- Wrap the tape around this widest point, again keeping it level and parallel to the floor on all sides.
- Pull it snug, not tight, and take the reading without holding your breath or tensing your glutes.
- Measure twice and use the average if the two readings differ by more than half a centimeter or a quarter inch.
Units don't matter — as long as they match
You can measure in centimeters or inches; the ratio comes out the same either way because the units cancel out in the division. The only rule is that both measurements need to use the same unit. If your waist is in inches, your hips need to be in inches too, or the resulting number will be meaningless.
How Do I Calculate the Waist-to-Hip Ratio?
Once you have both measurements in the same unit, the calculation itself takes seconds.
That's the entire formula. There's no weighting, no age adjustment, and no conversion factor — just one number divided by another. The result is typically a decimal somewhere between about 0.65 and 1.10 for most adults, and it's usually reported rounded to two decimal places.
Worked example: a 78 cm waist and 96 cm hip
Example calculation — Female adult
| Waist circumference | 78 cm |
| Hip circumference | 96 cm |
| Calculation | 78 ÷ 96 |
A ratio of 0.81 sits just above the commonly cited 0.80 threshold for women, which is discussed in more detail in the next section — it's a useful illustration of how close to the boundary many real measurements land, and why a single decimal point shouldn't be treated as a hard pass/fail line.
Worked example: a 92 cm waist and 99 cm hip
Example calculation — Male adult
| Waist circumference | 92 cm |
| Hip circumference | 99 cm |
| Calculation | 92 ÷ 99 |
For an adult man, a ratio of 0.93 would generally be flagged as moderate risk under WHO reference ranges, which sit lower for men than for women because men naturally carry proportionally more visceral fat at any given waist size.
In imperial units, the result is identical
If you prefer inches, the calculation works the same way. A 30-inch waist and a 38-inch hip, for instance, gives 30 ÷ 38 = 0.79 — almost exactly the same ratio as the metric example above, because the unit itself cancels out of the division. This is one reason WHR travels well internationally: a clinic in Manila and a clinic in Manchester can compare numbers without converting anything.
What Is the Ideal Waist-to-Hip Ratio?
"Ideal" is a strong word for a measurement this variable, so it helps to think in terms of risk bands rather than a single perfect number. The World Health Organization's most widely cited reference ranges differ by sex, because men and women carry visceral fat differently even at similar total body fat levels.
| Risk Category | Women | Men |
|---|---|---|
| Low risk | 0.80 or lower | 0.90 or lower |
| Moderate risk | 0.81 – 0.84 | 0.91 – 0.99 |
| High risk | 0.85 or higher | 1.00 or higher |
These bands come from World Health Organization guidance built around a single, widely used cutoff: a WHR above 0.90 in men or above 0.85 in women is generally classified as indicating substantially increased health risk from abdominal fat distribution, sometimes described as "abdominal obesity" in clinical literature. Some national health bodies, including bodies in the UK and parts of the Asia-Pacific region, use slightly stricter thresholds, particularly for populations with a known higher cardiometabolic risk at lower body weights.
Why "ideal" isn't one universal number
A WHR is read in context, not in isolation. A naturally narrow-hipped woman with a 0.81 ratio is in a very different situation than a woman with the same ratio achieved through significant central weight gain. Age matters too — body fat naturally redistributes toward the abdomen with age in both sexes, partly due to hormonal shifts, which means the same ratio can carry slightly different implications at 25 versus 65. None of this means the reference ranges are meaningless; it means they work best as a starting point for a conversation with a healthcare provider rather than a final verdict.
Why Is Waist-to-Hip Ratio Important?
WHR matters because of where it points, not because of the number itself. A high ratio is a flag for a fat-distribution pattern that research has repeatedly linked to a cluster of related health risks, even in people whose overall weight looks unremarkable on a standard chart.
Visceral fat behaves like an organ, not just padding
Fat stored around the abdomen and internal organs is biologically active tissue. It releases free fatty acids directly into the bloodstream heading to the liver, and it secretes inflammatory signaling proteins that can interfere with how effectively the body responds to insulin. Over years, this combination is associated with a higher likelihood of insulin resistance, unfavorable cholesterol patterns, elevated blood pressure, and — through all of these pathways together — a higher risk of cardiovascular events. Fat stored in the hips and thighs appears to behave more passively and, in some research, may even be mildly protective by comparison.
WHR shows up strongly in large population studies
One of the more influential pieces of evidence for WHR's relevance came from a large international study that followed heart attack patients across dozens of countries and compared them against matched control groups. Across that very large and geographically diverse dataset, waist-to-hip ratio tracked more closely with heart attack risk than body mass index did, and the relationship held up across different regions, ethnicities, and age groups. That single finding is a big part of why WHR earned a permanent place in cardiovascular risk discussions rather than being treated as a passing trend.
It can reveal risk that weight alone hides
Perhaps the most practical reason WHR matters is that it catches something BMI structurally cannot: two people of identical height and weight can have meaningfully different cardiometabolic risk profiles if one carries that weight centrally and the other carries it peripherally. This is especially relevant for people sometimes described in research as "normal weight obese" — individuals whose BMI sits in the healthy range but who still carry a disproportionate amount of visceral fat. WHR, used alongside other measurements, can surface that risk earlier than weight or BMI alone would.
WHR vs. BMI vs. Waist Circumference
None of these three measurements is "the best" in every situation — they each answer a slightly different question, and the most complete picture usually comes from looking at more than one.
| Metric | What It Captures | Main Limitation |
|---|---|---|
| Waist-to-Hip Ratio | Body fat distribution — central vs. peripheral storage | Doesn't capture total body fat or muscle mass |
| Body Mass Index (BMI) | Weight relative to height, a rough total-mass screen | Can't distinguish fat from muscle, or where fat is stored |
| Waist Circumference Alone | Absolute abdominal fat, independent of hip size | Doesn't account for differences in overall frame size |
Where BMI falls short
BMI was never designed as a body-composition tool — it's a population-screening formula from the nineteenth century, originally built for actuarial and demographic purposes. It cannot tell the difference between a heavily muscled athlete and someone carrying the same weight as fat, and it says nothing at all about where that weight sits on the body. Two people with an identical BMI of 27 could have completely different health profiles depending on their waist-to-hip ratio.
Where waist circumference alone falls short
Waist circumference by itself is a genuinely useful number — many clinical guidelines use it as a standalone abdominal-obesity screen — but it doesn't adjust for an individual's natural frame size. A 95 cm waist on someone with a broad, large-framed pelvis tells a different story than the same 95 cm waist on someone with a narrow frame. Dividing by hip circumference is a simple way to normalize for that frame-size difference.
Why combining metrics works best
In practice, clinicians and researchers increasingly favor using two or three of these measurements together rather than picking a single "winner." A reasonable home-tracking approach looks like this: calculate BMI for a quick total-mass reference, calculate WHR to understand distribution, and track waist circumference on its own as a simple absolute number that's easy to watch trend over time. Used together, the three measurements compensate for each other's blind spots far better than any one of them does alone.
What Factors Affect Your WHR?
Waist-to-hip ratio is not purely a lifestyle scoreboard. Genetics, age, hormones, and daily habits all push the number in different directions, often at the same time, which is part of why two people can do the exact same workout routine and see their ratios change differently.
Genetics and natural frame
Where your body tends to store extra fat is substantially inherited. Studies of twins and families consistently find a meaningful genetic component to fat-distribution patterns, separate from the genetic component of total body fat. This is why WHR can vary noticeably between siblings raised in the same household with similar diets — bone structure, hip width, and fat-storage tendencies are all shaped by inherited factors that no amount of dieting will fundamentally change.
Age and hormonal shifts
Fat distribution tends to drift centrally with age in both sexes. In men, testosterone gradually declining over decades is associated with a slow shift toward more abdominal storage. In women, the hormonal changes around menopause — particularly the drop in estrogen, which has a protective effect on peripheral fat storage during reproductive years — often produce a noticeable rise in WHR even without any change in total weight. This is a normal physiological transition, not a personal failing, and it's one of the more well-documented reasons WHR reference ranges sometimes get applied with extra context for postmenopausal women.
Sex and reproductive hormones
Beyond age-related shifts, the underlying hormonal profile that differs between men and women throughout adulthood is itself a major driver of why male and female reference ranges differ. Estrogen tends to favor gluteofemoral (hip and thigh) fat storage, while testosterone and cortisol both tend to favor abdominal storage — which is part of the biological reasoning behind sex-specific WHR cutoffs in the first place.
Lifestyle factors you can influence
- Diet patterns — particularly added sugar, refined carbohydrate, and alcohol intake — are associated with greater visceral fat accumulation than other calorie sources of equal energy content.
- Physical activity, especially a combination of cardiovascular exercise and resistance training, is one of the most consistently effective levers for reducing visceral fat specifically.
- Chronic stress and poor sleep both raise cortisol exposure over time, and cortisol is one of the more direct hormonal drivers of central fat storage.
- Smoking is independently associated with a more central fat-distribution pattern in multiple long-term studies, on top of its many other cardiovascular risks.
How to Lower a High Waist-to-Hip Ratio Naturally
Because WHR mostly tracks visceral fat, the same evidence-based habits that reduce cardiometabolic risk in general also tend to bring the ratio down over time. There's no shortcut that targets the waist specifically — "spot reduction" through ab exercises alone isn't supported by the evidence — but a handful of consistent habits, kept up for months rather than days, reliably shift fat distribution in a healthier direction.
Adjust what's regularly on your plate
Diets higher in fiber, lean protein, and unprocessed whole foods are consistently associated with lower visceral fat levels in research, while diets high in added sugar, refined grains, and ultra-processed foods trend the other way. Cutting back on sugary drinks alone is one of the more well-supported single changes for reducing central fat over time, since liquid sugar appears to be particularly efficient at promoting visceral storage. None of this requires an extreme or restrictive approach — gradual, sustainable shifts in everyday eating patterns outperform short-term crash diets in almost every long-term study that's compared the two.
Move in ways that target visceral fat specifically
Aerobic exercise — brisk walking, cycling, swimming, running — has some of the strongest direct evidence for reducing visceral fat, independent of total weight change. Resistance training adds to that effect by building muscle mass, which raises resting metabolic rate and improves insulin sensitivity, both of which support healthier long-term fat distribution. Most public health guidance points toward roughly 150 minutes of moderate aerobic activity per week combined with two or more strength sessions, though any consistent increase in movement from a sedentary baseline tends to help.
Protect your sleep and manage stress
Because cortisol is one of the more direct hormonal drivers of central fat storage, chronic short sleep and unmanaged stress can work against an otherwise solid diet and exercise routine. Adults who consistently sleep fewer than six hours a night show a higher rate of visceral fat gain in multiple longitudinal studies, even after controlling for diet and activity level. Practical stress-management approaches — regular movement, social connection, time outdoors, and basic sleep hygiene like a consistent bedtime — are not just "nice to have" in this context; they have a measurable physiological link to fat distribution.
Reconsider alcohol and smoking
Alcohol is calorie-dense, tends to be consumed alongside other indulgent foods, and has been specifically linked to central fat accumulation in heavier drinkers — a pattern sometimes informally referred to in older literature by names like "beer belly," though the underlying mechanism applies to alcohol broadly, not beer specifically. Smoking cessation, meanwhile, is associated with numerous health benefits that outweigh the modest, often temporary weight redistribution some people experience after quitting.
Common Mistakes When Measuring WHR
Most "my WHR keeps changing" confusion traces back to one of a handful of repeatable measuring errors, not an actual change in body composition.
A — too high (under the ribs) · B — correct (natural waist) · C — too low (top of the hip bone)
- Measuring at the wrong height. The most frequent error is wrapping the tape under the ribcage or at the navel by default rather than finding the true midpoint between the lowest rib and the top of the hip bone — these can be several centimeters apart.
- Pulling the tape too tight. Compressing the skin even slightly can shave a meaningful amount off the reading. The tape should rest snugly, not dig in.
- Letting the tape sag in the back. Without a mirror or helper, it's easy for the tape to stay level at the front and dip an inch lower at the back, which inflates the apparent waist or hip circumference.
- Measuring right after a large meal or first thing after waking. Normal digestive bloating and overnight fluid shifts can move the number by a centimeter or more — pick a consistent time of day instead.
- Holding your breath or flexing. Sucking in the stomach or tensing the glutes during measurement produces a flattering but inaccurate number that won't be repeatable next time.
- Measuring over bulky clothing. Waistbands, belts, and thick fabric all add false bulk or compress the true circumference — measure over light clothing or bare skin.
- Skipping the second measurement. A single reading can be off by a centimeter just from tape placement. Two readings, averaged, are far more reliable than one.
WHR Across Different Groups and Life Stages
The standard WHO bands are a useful general reference, but a handful of groups benefit from reading their own number with extra context.
Athletes and strength-trained individuals
People with significant muscle mass — particularly broad-shouldered, narrow-hipped athletes, or anyone who has built up the gluteal and hip musculature through strength training — can show WHR values outside the "low risk" band for reasons that have nothing to do with visceral fat. A wider waist relative to hips can simply reflect a muscular trunk or naturally narrow hip structure. In these cases, waist circumference alone, body fat percentage, or a body composition scan gives a more accurate risk picture than WHR in isolation.
Different ethnic backgrounds
Research consistently shows that the relationship between body fat distribution and metabolic risk isn't identical across all populations. Several studies have found that people of South Asian descent, for example, tend to develop insulin resistance and related metabolic risk at lower waist circumferences and lower BMIs than other groups, leading some health bodies to recommend lower waist-circumference thresholds for South Asian populations specifically. WHR itself doesn't yet have as many widely adopted ethnicity-specific cutoffs as waist circumference does, which is a reasonable argument for treating the general WHO bands as a starting reference rather than a precise universal threshold.
Older adults
As covered in the factors section, fat distribution shifts centrally with age in both sexes, partly independent of any change in habits. For adults over roughly 65, some research suggests WHR retains its predictive value for cardiovascular risk just as well as — or in some studies, better than — it does in younger adults, even as the "typical" ratio for that age group trends a little higher. This makes it a reasonable measurement to keep tracking later in life rather than something that becomes less relevant with age.
Children and adolescents
WHR is rarely used as a primary screening tool in children, mainly because growing bodies change shape unpredictably and there isn't the same depth of longitudinal reference data that exists for adults. Pediatric growth charts and BMI-for-age percentiles, interpreted by a pediatrician, remain the standard approach for young people; WHR calculators built for adult reference ranges should not be applied to children.
Pregnancy and postpartum
As noted earlier, pregnancy mechanically changes waist and hip measurements in ways unrelated to fat distribution, and most clinical guidance recommends waiting until well after delivery — commonly several months, sometimes longer depending on individual recovery — before resuming WHR tracking as a meaningful number.
Tracking Your WHR Over Time
A single WHR reading is a snapshot. The trend across months is the part that actually tells you something useful about whether your habits are working.
A realistic trend isn't a straight line — month 3 ticked up slightly here, and the overall direction still mattered more than any single point.
How often to actually measure
Daily measuring tends to create noise, not insight — normal hydration, digestion, and even posture can shift a reading by half a centimeter or more from one day to the next. Monthly measurements, taken under the same conditions described earlier in this guide, give enough separation for real change to show up above that day-to-day noise floor, without the discouragement that comes from watching numbers bounce around with no clear pattern.
What to log alongside the number
A simple log with four columns — date, waist, hip, calculated ratio — is enough for most people. Some find it useful to add a one-line note about anything unusual (a higher-stress month, a vacation, a new training block), since that context makes the trend line much easier to interpret honestly six months later.
Reading the trend, not the noise
A drop of 0.01–0.02 over a single month is well within normal measurement variation and isn't worth reacting to either way. A consistent downward (or upward) drift sustained across three or more consecutive months is a much more reliable signal that something — diet, training, sleep, stress, or some combination — is genuinely shifting your fat distribution.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a good waist-to-hip ratio for a woman?
Under World Health Organization guidance, a WHR of 0.80 or lower is generally considered low risk for women, 0.81–0.84 is considered moderate risk, and 0.85 or above is considered high risk for cardiometabolic conditions linked to abdominal fat distribution. These bands are a general reference, not an individual diagnosis.
What is a good waist-to-hip ratio for a man?
For men, a WHR of 0.90 or lower is typically classified as low risk, 0.91–0.99 as moderate risk, and 1.00 or higher as high risk. The threshold sits higher than the female reference range because men naturally carry proportionally more visceral fat at any given waist measurement.
Can a waist-to-hip ratio be too low?
An extremely low WHR isn't typically flagged as a health risk the way a high one is, but an unusually low ratio combined with a very low overall body weight can sometimes reflect inadequate nutrition rather than good health. Context — including total weight, energy levels, and menstrual regularity where relevant — matters more than the ratio alone.
Is waist-to-hip ratio more accurate than BMI?
WHR and BMI measure different things, so "more accurate" depends on the question being asked. For predicting cardiovascular risk specifically, several large studies have found WHR tracks more closely with outcomes than BMI does. For a general total-mass screening number, BMI is faster to calculate and still widely used. Many clinicians prefer using both together.
How often should I measure my waist-to-hip ratio?
Once a month, under consistent conditions — similar time of day, similar clothing, same landmarks — is generally enough to spot a meaningful trend without chasing normal day-to-day measurement noise. Measuring more frequently than weekly rarely adds useful information for most people.
Does WHR change when I lose weight?
It often does, but not always proportionally. Because fat tends to mobilize from visceral stores relatively efficiently with sustained weight loss, many people see their WHR improve alongside scale weight. However, the exact pace and pattern varies by individual, genetics, and which areas were carrying the most fat to begin with.
Can someone have a healthy WHR and still be classified as overweight by BMI?
Yes. This is one of the more useful things WHR reveals — a person can have a BMI in the "overweight" category while carrying that weight predominantly in the hips and thighs rather than the abdomen, which research associates with comparatively lower cardiometabolic risk than the same BMI carried centrally.
What's the difference between waist-to-hip ratio and waist-to-height ratio?
Waist-to-hip ratio compares your waist to your hip circumference, capturing fat distribution between two body regions. Waist-to-height ratio instead compares waist circumference to height, and is sometimes used as an alternative abdominal-obesity screen, particularly because it doesn't require a second measurement site. Both are used in research; neither has fully replaced the other.
Why do men and women have different WHR reference ranges?
Reproductive hormones influence fat storage differently in each sex — estrogen tends to favor fat storage in the hips and thighs, while testosterone and cortisol tend to favor abdominal storage. Because of this biological difference, the same numerical ratio carries different average health implications for men compared to women, which is why the cutoffs are set separately.
Can exercise lower my WHR without significant weight loss?
Yes, to a meaningful degree. Aerobic exercise and resistance training have both been shown to reduce visceral fat specifically, sometimes with only modest changes in total body weight, especially when muscle gain offsets fat loss on the scale. This is one reason "the scale didn't move much" doesn't necessarily mean fat distribution hasn't improved.
Is WHR a useful number for athletes and bodybuilders?
It's less reliable for this group. A muscular trunk, well-developed glutes, or a naturally narrow pelvis can all push WHR outside the typical "low risk" band for reasons unrelated to visceral fat or cardiometabolic risk. Waist circumference alone or a body composition scan generally gives athletes a more accurate picture.
What do I need to measure my waist-to-hip ratio at home?
Just a flexible, non-stretch tape measure — the type used for sewing or body measurements — and a flat place to stand. No special equipment, scale, or app is required, though a notepad to log your numbers over time makes the measurement far more useful.
Is my WHR permanently determined by genetics?
Genetics strongly influences your natural frame and baseline fat-storage tendency, but it doesn't lock your ratio in place. Diet, exercise, sleep, stress, and alcohol intake all measurably shift visceral fat levels over time, meaning two people with similar genetic starting points can still land on noticeably different ratios after a year of different habits.
Should I be concerned about one high WHR reading?
A single reading, especially a first one, is best treated as a baseline rather than a verdict. Measurement error, time of day, and recent meals can all shift a one-off number. A trend across several months, or a conversation with a healthcare provider about your overall risk profile, is far more informative than reacting to a single data point.
Is there a calculator that works out WHR for me automatically?
Yes — once you have your waist and hip measurements in hand, an online waist-to-hip ratio calculator can divide the two numbers and place the result against standard reference ranges instantly, which is a convenient way to skip the manual division and quickly see which risk band a given measurement falls into.