Answer · Harmony
What is a good fWHR?
There is no good fWHR in the sense forums mean. The research mostly links a wider ratio to perceived dominance, not attractiveness, and even that replicates unevenly. Attractiveness research supports averageness, symmetry and sex-typical features, so a typical fWHR is simply part of an average face. Body fat also raises the ratio without changing bone.
How the parts of a face relate to one another.
Explore proportionsWhat fWHR measures
fWHR, facial width-to-height ratio, divides the width across the cheekbones by the height of the middle of the face, roughly brow or eyelid to upper lip. A higher ratio is a wider, shorter midface; a lower one is narrower and taller. Different studies pick different endpoints, which is one reason published averages disagree and one reason two calculators give you two different results.
Why there is no target
fWHR became a research variable as a possible cue to dominance and aggression, and forums turned that into a goal. The jump from dominant-looking to attractive was never established. A wide midface can read as more masculine, which is where the ratio gets what support it has, but that is one cue among several, and the effect of masculine features on ratings of male faces is itself mixed.
What you can and cannot change
The bone is structural. Cheekbone width and midface height are set by the zygomatic bones and the maxilla, and nothing non-surgical moves them; BecomeTen does not recommend surgery. What moves is soft tissue and the photo: cheek fat adds width, hair at the sides reads as width, low brows shorten the height, and a close lens narrows the outer face. The ratio also shifts over a lifetime, mostly through soft tissue, which does fWHR change with age covers.
To see where you land, the free fWHR calculator reports a band, narrower, typical or wider, and says whether width or height drives it. Read it alongside the other proportions in is the midface ratio important rather than as a score on its own. Compare results only within one tool and one photo setup, never across calculators.
Sources
- 1.Facial attractiveness: evolutionary based research — Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B (2011)(Opens in a new window)
- 2.Deciphering faces: quantifiable visual cues to weight — Perception (2010)(Opens in a new window)
- 3.Facial adiposity: A cue to health? — Perception (2009)(Opens in a new window)