Score Interpretation
The IQ score chart is a visual map of the bell curve that converts a raw test score into a population-relative position. Every score from 55 to 145 corresponds to a specific percentile and a named classification band. This guide covers the complete chart with exact percentile data, all seven WAIS-IV classification bands, an interactive score lookup, and practical interpretation notes for every range.
Understanding the chart properly means reading your score as a position on a distribution, not as an absolute measure of intelligence. Percentile context, test conditions, and norm sample all shape what a number actually means.
Every standardised IQ test is designed so its scores follow a normal (bell-shaped) distribution within the normed reference population. The midpoint is always set to 100. The curve is symmetric, meaning exactly half the population scores above 100 and half below. The shape determines how rare any given score is — scores cluster densely near the centre and become progressively rarer toward the extremes.
Bell curve for a standard normal distribution (mean 100, SD 15). The shaded centre region covers the 68% of scores between IQ 85 and 115.
The key number that governs the entire IQ score chart is the standard deviation (SD) of 15. This is the unit of spread used by the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS), the Stanford-Binet, and the majority of modern IQ-style assessments. The WAIS-IV classification system, published by Pearson Assessments, defines all seven standard bands using this SD.
The number 100 has no intrinsic meaning attached to raw cognitive ability. It is a reference anchor set deliberately at the median of the normed population when a test is standardised. If the same test were administered to a different population, the raw score needed to achieve 100 would change. This is why comparing scores across tests with different norm samples requires caution. For a full explanation, see the average IQ score guide.
The normal distribution has a fixed property: exactly 68.27% of all values fall within one standard deviation of the mean, 95.45% fall within two, and 99.73% within three. Translated to IQ scores (mean 100, SD 15), this gives:
These proportions are not observations about any specific population — they are fixed by the mathematics of the normal distribution. Any test that uses a mean of 100 and SD of 15 will produce exactly these percentile bands regardless of the population it was normed on.
Use the lookup tool below to find the approximate percentile and classification for any score between 55 and 145. The full reference table follows.
Interactive Score Lookup
Score
100
Percentile
50th
Band
Average
Approximate values based on a standard normal distribution (mean 100, SD 15). Actual percentile depends on the specific test and norm sample used.
The table below maps key IQ scores to their standard deviation, approximate percentile, WAIS-IV classification, and estimated frequency within a normed population. Highlighted rows mark the 50th-percentile midpoint (IQ 100) and the Mensa-threshold band (130+).
| IQ Score | SD | Percentile | Classification | Frequency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 145+ | +3.0 | 99.9th | Very Superior | <0.1% |
| 135 | +2.3 | ~99th | Very Superior | ~1% |
| 130 | +2.0 | ~98th | Very Superior | ~2% |
| 125 | +1.7 | ~95th | Superior | ~5% |
| 120 | +1.3 | ~91st | Superior | ~9% |
| 115 | +1.0 | ~84th | High Average | ~16% |
| 110 | +0.7 | ~75th | High Average | ~25% |
| 105 | +0.3 | ~63rd | Average | ~37% |
| 100 | 0 | 50th | Average | 50% |
| 95 | −0.3 | ~37th | Average | ~37% |
| 90 | −0.7 | ~25th | Average | ~25% |
| 85 | −1.0 | ~16th | Low Average | ~16% |
| 80 | −1.3 | ~9th | Low Average | ~9% |
| 75 | −1.7 | ~5th | Borderline | ~5% |
| 70 | −2.0 | ~2nd | Borderline | ~2% |
| 65 | −2.3 | ~1st | Extremely Low | ~1% |
| 55 | −3.0 | ~0.1st | Extremely Low | <0.1% |
Percentiles are approximations derived from a standard normal distribution (mean 100, SD 15). WAIS-IV classification bands are the clinical standard. Actual values vary by test and norm sample.
Each row represents a specific score and the statistical position it corresponds to. The “Frequency” column shows roughly how many people out of 100 would score below that level — a frequency of ~98% for IQ 130 means approximately 98 in every 100 people score below 130 in the reference population. The SD column shows how many standard deviations the score sits from the mean, which is the raw statistical unit underlying the chart.
The seven standard bands below follow the WAIS-IV classification system, the most widely used framework in clinical and research contexts. Expand any band for percentile context, interpretation notes, and practical caveats. For a comprehensive standalone treatment of each band, see the complete IQ score ranges guide.
Bar widths reflect approximate population share. Based on a normal distribution (mean 100, SD 15).
The Very Superior band begins exactly two standard deviations above the population mean. At 130, you have outperformed roughly 98 out of every 100 people in the normed reference group. This is the most cited threshold for formal giftedness classifications and the standard cut-off for most high-IQ societies, including Mensa International, which requires a score at or above the 98th percentile on an approved supervised assessment. Note that online IQ-style tests are not on approved lists — they are useful directional indicators, not admission evidence.
The Superior band represents clearly above-average reasoning performance. A score of 120 places you above roughly 9 in 10 people in the comparison group; a score of 129 pushes that to just under 97 in 100. Improvement within this band is mostly about eliminating specific error types — rushing spatial rotation items, misreading inductive sequences on later questions — rather than overhauling general strategy.
The High Average band is what most people informally call a strong score. It captures the top quarter to top tenth of the reference population — consistently above median without reaching the rarer Superior classifications. Most people in this range benefit most from targeted practice on specific item types they find hardest, typically spatial rotation and inductive matrix tasks where difficulty spikes sharply in the final third of a timed assessment.
The Average band is the broadest classification and captures roughly half the reference population in a 20-point window. A score here is solidly within the normal range by any major clinical or research standard. The internal span matters: a score of 90 (25th percentile) and one of 108 (70th percentile) share the same band label but represent very different positions within the population. Always check your percentile, not just the band name.
Scores in this band indicate performance below the median but within the lower segment of the normal distribution. Roughly 1 in 6 people score here. Poor test conditions, unfamiliarity with matrix formats, or high time pressure can produce results in this band even for people whose actual reasoning baseline sits higher. A clean re-test under better conditions is worthwhile before drawing any conclusions.
The Borderline classification is used in clinical settings as a threshold marker, but on online assessments a score in this range most often reflects testing conditions — significant distraction, unfamiliarity with the format, or severe time mismanagement — rather than a stable cognitive baseline. Multiple sessions under controlled conditions are necessary before treating this result as indicative.
Clinical tests apply the Extremely Low classification below 70. For online IQ-style assessments, a score at this level almost certainly reflects session conditions — significant technical problems, major interruptions, or severe time mismanagement — rather than a stable cognitive baseline. Do not use an online score below 70 as a meaningful data point without controlled re-testing.
“Good” depends entirely on what you are trying to understand. Relative to the general population, any score above 110 places you in the top 25% — comfortably above average by any standard. If the question is about specific thresholds for academic selection, professional assessment, or high-IQ society admission, percentile framing is more precise than a band label. For a detailed breakdown of scores above 110, the high IQ score guide covers every threshold with population context and practical next steps.
Mensa International, the most recognised high-IQ society globally, sets its admission threshold at the 98th percentile — a performance level achieved by approximately 1 in 50 people in a normed population. On the WAIS-IV and Stanford-Binet 5, this corresponds to a score of 130 or higher. On the Cattell Culture Fair scale (which uses SD 24 instead of 15), the equivalent score is approximately 148.
Qualifying for Mensa requires a score from an approved supervised psychometric assessment. Online IQ-style tests, including IQMog, are not on approved lists and do not substitute for a proctored clinical assessment. An online result near 130 is a directional indicator worth following up with a formal test — not admission evidence in itself.
| Threshold | Score (WAIS scale) | Percentile |
|---|---|---|
| Mensa admission | 130 | 98th |
| Top 1% (gifted range) | ∼135 | 99th |
| Triple Nine Society | ∼146 | 99.9th |
| High Average (top 25%) | 110 | 75th |
A score of 112 on one test may correspond to the 79th percentile. The same number on a test normed on a different population may map to the 74th or 82nd. The band label would be the same (High Average) in all cases, but the positional meaning differs. Whenever possible, refer to the specific percentile your test reports rather than just the descriptive band. For a full explanation of how percentile mechanics work, see the complete IQ score ranges guide.
The IQ score chart is not fixed across time. Raw scores on standardised tests rose substantially across many countries during the 20th century — a trend documented by researcher James Flynn and now known as the Flynn Effect. The average rate of gain was roughly 3 IQ points per decade between the 1930s and 1990s in many Western countries. Because tests are periodically re-normed to keep 100 as the centre, this rise is invisible in score reports — but it has real consequences for cross-era comparisons.
Researchers attribute the Flynn Effect primarily to environmental changes rather than genetic ones. The key drivers identified in the literature include:
Fluid reasoning tasks — the kind measured by Raven-style matrix problems, which form the basis of many online IQ-style assessments including IQMog — showed some of the largest gains in Flynn Effect research. This suggests that exposure to abstract visual reasoning tasks directly improves measured performance on this category.
More recent data from Norway, Denmark, Finland, and the UK shows the rising trend has plateaued or reversed modestly since the late 1990s. A 2024 meta-analysis covering 1,038 samples found the contemporary Flynn Effect has slowed to approximately 1.2–2.2 points per decade, compared with the 3-point rate observed in earlier decades. Researchers are still debating causes, with hypotheses including changes in educational approach and increased time spent on non-analytical media.
The practical implication is that your score should only be interpreted relative to the specific norm sample your test uses — not against historical averages or populations from different eras. A score of 100 on a test normed in 2020 is not equivalent to 100 on a test normed in 1970. Online IQ-style tests that do not disclose their norming methodology or sample date are particularly difficult to interpret in cross-era context.
Online IQ-style tests produce scores on the same 100-midpoint scale as clinical assessments, but they operate under different conditions and carry different levels of precision. The chart positions they produce are directional estimates, not clinically validated placements. Understanding the key differences helps calibrate how much weight to place on an online result.
IQMog uses a fixed Raven-style matrix dataset with a consistent scoring model. This means your score is calculated against the same item pool each time, producing results that are repeatable and comparable across sessions. The output includes a score on the standard 100-midpoint scale, a percentile band, and a cognitive profile that maps to the IQ score chart classification system.
What IQMog is not: a supervised clinical assessment, a diagnosis tool, or an admission test for any programme or society. The results are best used for self-understanding, tracking improvement over time, and identifying which specific reasoning types are strongest. For questions about test accuracy and reliability, the IQ test accuracy and reliability guide explains what standard error means for online results.
The biggest source of gap between an online score and your actual position on the chart is not the test instrument — it is testing conditions. Clinical research on test-retest reliability shows score swings of 5–10 points between sessions even under controlled conditions. Online assessments conducted without environmental controls can show variance of 10–15 points or more.
A score at the boundary between two bands — for example, 109 vs. 110 between Average and High Average — should always be treated as a range, not a precise fixed value. One clean re-test under better conditions will give a more reliable chart placement than any amount of analysis of a single noisy session.
A chart position is most reliable when it appears consistently across two or more sessions under comparable conditions. A single strong session might reflect optimal conditions rather than a stable baseline. Two consistent results give meaningful signal — and the specific percentile your test reports, rather than the band label, is the most useful number to track over time.
7
Standard WAIS-IV bands
The WAIS-IV classification system defines seven named bands used across clinical and research contexts worldwide, from Extremely Low to Very Superior.
68%
Score between 85 and 115
Fixed by the mathematics of the normal distribution. The remaining 32% are split evenly above 115 and below 85.
3 pts
Flynn Effect per decade
Average raw score rise per decade through most of the 20th century. Tests are re-normed periodically to keep 100 as the centre, making this gain invisible in reports.
On the standard IQ score chart, the normal range runs from 90 to 109 under the WAIS-IV classification system. This band captures roughly 50% of the normed reference population and spans the 25th to 75th percentile. The broader statistical normal band — one standard deviation either side of 100 — stretches from 85 to 115 and includes approximately 68% of the population.
The term genius does not correspond to a precise clinical classification on the standard IQ score chart. The WAIS-IV labels 130+ as Very Superior, placing it at or above the 98th percentile. Some researchers and popularisers apply the word genius informally at 140+ (roughly 99.6th percentile) or 145+ (99.9th percentile). Mensa International, the best-known high-IQ society, sets its admission threshold at the 98th percentile, which corresponds to approximately 130 on a WAIS-IV or Stanford-Binet 5 assessment.
A score of 120 sits in the Superior classification band on the standard IQ score chart, placing it at approximately the 91st percentile. This means the individual outperformed roughly 91% of the normed reference population. It represents clearly above-average reasoning performance, though it falls short of the 130+ threshold required by most high-IQ societies. On a standard normal distribution with mean 100 and SD 15, a score of 120 is 1.33 standard deviations above the mean.
An IQ score chart maps raw scores to named classification bands such as Average, Superior, and Very Superior. A percentile chart maps those same scores to their position within the reference population — showing what share of people scored below each score. The two convey the same underlying information in different formats. A percentile is more precise because it eliminates band label ambiguity: a score of 90 and a score of 109 both carry the Average label but sit at the 25th and 73rd percentile respectively.
Your position on an IQ-style score chart can shift based on testing conditions, item-format familiarity, pacing strategy, and deliberate practice on specific reasoning task types. Research on the Flynn Effect shows average performance rising roughly 3 points per decade through the 20th century, largely attributed to environmental factors including education, test exposure, and nutrition. For individuals, the most reliable improvement levers are controlling test conditions, reducing careless pacing errors, and practising the specific matrix and spatial reasoning formats the test uses.
Free assessment to start and complete. Unlock your score, percentile, and band context after the test. Built on a fixed Raven-style dataset and consistent scoring model for repeatable, comparable results across sessions.