Audited 05 Aug 2026·Last updated 15 Sept 2026·3 citations·Tier 2·0 uses

Maintenance Calorie Calculator

Maintenance calorie calculator: Mifflin-St Jeor BMR from sex, age, height, and weight, times your activity factor — the daily calories that hold weight steady.

Maintenance Calorie Calculator

Mifflin-St Jeor equation sex
years
cm
kg
Estimated maintenance calories
2,720.25
Primary result from the named standard variant.
Mifflin-St Jeor resting energy
1,755kcal/day

Background.

Maintenance calories are the daily energy intake at which your weight holds steady — consumption matching expenditure. Estimating that number is a two-step calculation with a long research pedigree: first the energy your body burns at complete rest, then a multiplier for how active your life actually is.

The resting piece uses the Mifflin-St Jeor equation, published in 1990 from indirect-calorimetry measurements and since endorsed by the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics as the most accurate of the common predictive formulas for healthy adults — typically within about 10% of measured resting expenditure. It reads BMR = 10·weight(kg) + 6.25·height(cm) − 5·age(years) + 5 for males, with −161 replacing +5 for females — heavier and taller bodies burn more, each year of age trims about 5 kcal/day, and the sex constant reflects average body-composition differences.

The activity multiplier then scales resting burn to a whole life: 1.2 for sedentary desk-bound days, 1.375 for light exercise a few times weekly, 1.55 for moderate training most days, 1.725 for hard daily training, 1.9 for heavy physical work or double sessions. Choosing honestly is the step that decides the estimate's usefulness — self-rated activity runs notoriously optimistic, and one level too high adds several hundred phantom calories.

The result is a starting estimate for a healthy adult, not a measurement: individual metabolisms scatter around every equation, and pregnancy, illness, and athletic periodisation sit outside the model, as the scope note says. The practical use is calibration — eat near the estimate for two or three weeks, watch the scale's weekly average, and adjust by 100–200 kcal at a time. Your own trend data beats any formula.

What is maintenance calorie calculator?

Maintenance calories (total daily energy expenditure, TDEE) are the calories per day at which energy in equals energy out and body weight stays level. This page estimates them as Mifflin-St Jeor BMR × activity factor. The BMR term — 10·kg + 6.25·cm − 5·years, plus 5 (male) or minus 161 (female) — predicts resting energy burn, the majority component of TDEE for most people; the factor (1.2–1.9) folds in occupational movement, exercise, and daily activity. Eating consistently below the maintenance level produces weight loss, above it gain, at roughly 7,700 kcal per kilogram of body-weight change.

How to use this calculator.

  1. Select the sex used by the equation and enter age in years, height in centimetres, and weight in kilograms — the units the coefficients were fitted in.
  2. Pick the activity factor honestly, counting only what you actually do in a typical week: 1.2 sedentary, 1.375 light (1–3 sessions/week), 1.55 moderate (most days), 1.725 hard daily training, 1.9 physical labour or twice-daily training.
  3. Read both outputs: the BMR line is your estimated resting burn; the maintenance line is the full daily estimate.
  4. Treat the maintenance figure as a hypothesis: hold intake near it for 2–3 weeks, compare weekly-average weights, and nudge by 100–200 kcal until the trend flattens — that calibrated number supersedes the formula.
  5. Recompute after meaningful change — every 5 kg gained or lost, or a genuine shift in training or job activity — since both terms of the product move with you.

The formula.

Mifflin-St Jeor BMR multiplied by entered activity factor

The Mifflin-St Jeor coefficients are regression estimates from measured resting metabolism in about 500 adults: each kilogram of body mass adds ≈10 kcal/day of resting burn (tissue costs energy to run), each centimetre of height ≈6.25 (taller frames carry more lean mass at a given weight), each year of age subtracts ≈5 (lean mass and cellular activity decline slowly), and the sex constant (+5 vs −161) captures average male-female body-composition differences at identical size — about 166 kcal/day. Multiplying by the activity factor implements the standard physical-activity-level framework: total expenditure is expressed as a multiple of resting, from ≈1.2 for bed-to-desk living to ≈1.9 at the limits of sustained human activity. Both terms are population averages — individual BMRs scatter roughly ±10% around the prediction (genetics, thyroid status, lean-mass fraction), and activity factors are self-assessed — so the product is a well-founded starting point with honest error bars, refined only by observed weight trend. The engine evaluates the linear form and product in Decimal arithmetic, rounding once at the output.

A worked example.

Example

A 35-year-old man, 180 cm and 80 kg, trains moderately most days — activity factor 1.55. What intake should hold his weight? Resting burn first, term by term through Mifflin-St Jeor: weight contributes 10 × 80 = 800; height adds 6.25 × 180 = 1,125; age subtracts 5 × 35 = 175; the male constant adds 5. BMR = 800 + 1,125 − 175 + 5 = 1,755 kcal/day — what he would burn asleep and fasted. Life is not bed rest: scaling by the moderate-activity factor gives maintenance = 1,755 × 1.55 = 2,720.25, call it ≈2,720 kcal/day. Using the number: three weeks eating ≈2,700 with a flat weekly-average weight would confirm it; steady gain of a quarter-kilo a week would suggest the honest factor was nearer 1.4 (maintenance ≈2,460) and intake should come down accordingly. The formula opens the negotiation; the bathroom scale finishes it. And the same arithmetic prices a goal: a 500 kcal/day cut from confirmed maintenance projects roughly half a kilogram of loss per week.

sexmale
height Cm180
activity Factor1.55
age35
weight Kg80

Frequently asked questions.

Why use Mifflin-St Jeor instead of the Harris-Benedict equation?
Accuracy on modern populations. Harris-Benedict (1919) was derived a century ago and tends to overpredict today's measured resting rates by 5% or more; Mifflin-St Jeor (1990), fitted on contemporary adults with indirect calorimetry, lands within ±10% of measurement for the largest share of healthy people — the finding behind the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics' endorsement of it as the preferred predictive equation. No formula beats an actual metabolic measurement, but as defaults go this is the best-validated.
How do I choose an activity factor honestly?
Count behaviour, not intentions, over a typical week: 1.2 means genuinely sedentary — desk work, no structured exercise; 1.375 fits 1–3 light sessions weekly; 1.55 assumes moderate exercise most days (the worked example); 1.725 is hard training essentially daily; 1.9 belongs to manual labourers and two-a-day athletes. Most people overrate by one tier — gym sessions loom larger in memory than in hours — and one tier is worth 300+ kcal/day. When torn between two, take the lower and let the scale trend arbitrate upward.
How accurate will my estimate be?
Expect a real-world envelope of a couple of hundred kcal either way: the BMR equation itself scatters about ±10% across individuals (body composition, genetics, thyroid function), and the self-chosen activity factor adds its own, usually optimistic, error. That is why the estimate should be treated as a starting hypothesis — two to three weeks of consistent intake with weekly-average weigh-ins reveals your true maintenance to within ≈50–100 kcal, better than any equation can promise.
How do maintenance calories connect to losing or gaining weight?
Arithmetically, through the ≈7,700 kcal energy content of a kilogram of body tissue: a sustained 500 kcal/day deficit from true maintenance projects roughly 0.45 kg of loss weekly, a matching surplus the reverse (lean-gain practice favours smaller surpluses, ≈250–500 kcal). Two caveats keep the projection honest — maintenance itself declines as weight falls, so deficits shrink unless intake is re-anchored to a recomputed or re-measured maintenance every several kilograms, and initial glycogen-and-water shifts exaggerate week-one changes in both directions.
Does metabolism really slow with age, and by how much here?
In this equation, by 5 kcal/day per year — the example's 35-year-old carries a BMR about 100 kcal/day below his 15-year-old self at identical size, roughly a 4% effect per decade. Mechanistically much of that tracks gradual lean-mass loss rather than aging cells per se, which is why resistance training blunts it. Notably, large doubly-labelled-water studies find expenditure fairly stable from the 20s through 50s once body composition is accounted for — the practical lesson being that ‘middle-age spread’ owes more to activity and intake drift than to metabolic collapse.

How this page was produced

Published by
Quanta Calculator
Primary sources
3 cited below
Method
Mifflin-St Jeor BMR multiplied by entered activity factor
Published
Last verified

Built with AI assistance and verified by automated tests against the cited sources — every worked example on this page is computed by the same code that runs the calculator. How we build and check calculators.

In this category

Embed

Quanta Pro

Paid features are coming later.

  • All 1560 calculators remain free
  • No billing is enabled
Coming soon