
Cox rated him 160 for ages 17 to 26, the same as this page's score. Cox's childhood rating for him was 145.
An IQ of 160 means scoring higher than about 99.997% of people: roughly 1 in 31,574, or four standard deviations above average. It is the highest full-scale score most clinical IQ tests can report, and the number most often given to Einstein and Hawking, neither of whom had a test.
Plot 160 on the bell curve and it lands 4 standard deviations, or 60 points, to the right of the average. The area beyond it, coloured orange below, holds only 0.0032% of people, too thin to see without zooming in.
160 is exactly four standard deviations above average. Beyond it, standard tests stop counting and only extended scales go further.
160 is the most searched IQ above 150, and the most misused. Lists online give it to Albert Einstein, Stephen Hawking, Bill Gates and a string of actors. Einstein never took an IQ test; Hawking said he had no idea of his IQ; the Gates figure is worked back from an SAT score. The real 160 is far rarer than those lists suggest: about 260,000 people worldwide.
It is also a ceiling. The WAIS-IV and the Stanford-Binet 5 both report full-scale IQs from 40 to 160, which is four standard deviations either side of 100. A result of 160 on these tests means "at least 160": the test ran out of questions hard enough to say more. The Mega Society notes that on the Stanford-Binet, 160 corresponds to a rarity of about 1 in 30,000.
To meet one person scoring 160 or above, you would need, on average, a crowd of 31,574. Here is that crowd, built up step by step.
Every dot stands for a person. Only the orange one, one in the whole crowd, would be expected to reach 160.
| Worldwide (8.2 billion people) | about 260,000 |
| India | about 46,400 |
| United States | about 10,800 |
| United Kingdom | about 2,200 |
| Canada | about 1,320 |
| Australia | about 875 |
Population: World Bank, total population, 2025. Counts assume the same bell curve in every country and are rounded. Real tests can't sort people this finely, as the next sections explain.
Each society below admits a set top slice of the population and lists the score that matches it on the Wechsler adult scale. With a supervised result of 160, you would meet 5 of the 6 bars; the next, Mega Society, needs about 171.
Scores for Mensa, Intertel, Triple Nine and ISPE are the Wechsler figures those societies list or that match their percentile. Prometheus and Mega give only a rarity; the scores shown are the matching points on the standard scale. Prometheus says no test currently being given is approved for its entry. Online test results are not accepted by any of them.
A full-scale score of 160 is the last one the main clinical tests can give. Below, the highest full-scale result each test is able to give.
The top of the range rests on very little data. Scores are worked out by comparison with a norm sample, and for the WAIS-IV that sample was 2,200 adults. Only about 0.07 of them would be expected at 160 or above, so a result this high is extrapolated from the curve, not matched against people who actually scored it.
There is measurement error too. Psychologists report a likely range rather than a single point, usually about five points each side, which for 160 means about 155 to 165. The top of that range is beyond the test's ceiling. Online results are rougher, which is why ours stops at 145. Are online IQ tests accurate?
Sources: WAIS-IV range and norm sample from Canivez (2010), Mental Measurements Yearbook review; Stanford-Binet 5 and its Extended IQ from PRO-ED; WISC-V extended norms from Pearson Technical Report #6 (2019). Striped bars are extended scales, used only when a person hits the normal ceiling.
IQ tests don't all use the same yardstick. A scale with a larger standard deviation turns the same rank into a bigger number, especially this far above average.
Turn it around: if a test using the Cattell scale reports 160, the standard-scale equivalent is just 138. From an SD 16 test, 160 converts to about 156. Check the scale before comparing any high score. IQ standard deviations explained.
The figures below are not test scores. In 1926 the psychologist Catharine Cox rated 301 eminent people from records of their youth, giving each a childhood estimate and a second one for ages 17 to 26.

Cox rated him 160 for ages 17 to 26, the same as this page's score. Cox's childhood rating for him was 145.

Cox rated him 160 for ages 17 to 26, the same as this page's score. Cox's childhood rating for him was 150.
Source: Cox, C. M. (1926), Genetic Studies of Genius, Vol. II: The Early Mental Traits of Three Hundred Geniuses, Stanford University Press. Cox stressed that thin records pull estimates down. Read more in where the historical genius IQ estimates came from.
Search for a 160 IQ and the same famous names keep appearing. Here is what we found when we followed each figure back to where it started.

He never took an IQ test, and he isn't in Cox's 1926 study of historical geniuses, which only covered people born between 1450 and 1850.

Asked about his IQ by The New York Times Magazine in 2004, he said he had no idea, adding: "People who boast about their I.Q. are losers."

He has never published an IQ score. The 160 is an estimate worked back from his 1590 SAT result, not a test score.
Stated in two 1995 biographies, one of which calls it "estimated". No test is named.
Maxim reported in 2008 that "He does not have an I.Q. of 160", quoting him: "I'm not that smart."
Sources for every claim are listed in our celebrity IQ list.
IQ tests are built from a norm sample: the WAIS-IV, for example, was standardised on 2,200 adults. On a bell curve, you would expect only about 0.07 of those people, fewer than one, to score 160 or higher. A test can't place someone precisely against people it never measured, so the scales stop at four standard deviations above average.
Some societies start where the tests stop. The Prometheus Society admits people at 1 in 30,000, "four standard deviations above the norm", but says no test currently being given is approved for entry. For children, extended norms for the WISC-V reach 210 and the Stanford-Binet 5's Extended IQ reaches 225. Without an extended scale, 160 is the highest number a standard clinical test will give.
Sources: WAIS-IV range and sample from Canivez (2010); Stanford-Binet 5 range from PRO-ED; Prometheus Society; Mega Society.
An IQ of 160 means a test placed your reasoning at its very top, in the top 0.003% for your age. It is the start of the "exceptionally gifted" band. Because it is the ceiling, it is best read as a floor: your true level is 160 or above, and only an extended scale could estimate how far.
Levels and ranges from Gross, M. U. M. (2000), "Exceptionally and Profoundly Gifted Students: An Underserved Population", Understanding Our Gifted. They are a guide for education, not a ranking of people.
| IQ | Percentile | Rarity | Level |
|---|---|---|---|
| 156 | 99.9905th | 1 in 10,584 | Highly gifted |
| 158 | 99.9944th | 1 in 18,127 | Highly gifted |
| 160 | 99.9968th | 1 in 31,574 | Exceptionally gifted |
| 162 | 99.9982nd | 1 in 55,938 | Exceptionally gifted |
| 164 | 99.999th | 1 in 100,799 | Exceptionally gifted |
Yes. 160 is a very high IQ: about 1 person in 31,574 scores this high or higher, which puts it at the 99.9968th percentile. It is above the 130 that most definitions use for a high IQ, and at or above the 146 used by the Triple Nine Society for its 99.9th percentile entry.
An IQ of 160 is at about the 99.9968th percentile. Only about 0.0032% of people score 160 or higher.
About 1 person in 31,574 scores 160 or higher, on the standard bell curve. Across the world's population of about 8.2 billion, that would be roughly 260,000 people.
Yes, by any measure. 160 is higher than about 100% of people. Remember that a score this high needs a supervised professional test to be confirmed, and that it describes reasoning on a test, not every kind of talent.
Yes. Mensa accepts the top 2% on an approved, supervised test, which is about 130 on the standard scale. A supervised 160 would also meet the bar for Intertel, Triple Nine Society, International Society for Philosophical Enquiry and Prometheus Society. Online test results are not accepted.
No one knows. Einstein never took an IQ test, and he isn't in the 1926 study that estimated historical IQs. The 160 is a modern guess repeated without a source. Read the full story in our article on Einstein's IQ.
No, but it is the highest full-scale score most standard clinical tests report. Extended scales go further (up to 210 on the WISC-V extended norms and 225 on the Stanford-Binet 5 Extended IQ), and the highest scores ever claimed are covered in who has the highest IQ in the world.
Related: what counts as a good IQ score, the highest IQ in the world, famous people's IQs and the full IQ scale and range chart.
Behind a single score of 160 sit several separate abilities. Read about fluid vs crystallized intelligence, abstract reasoning, spatial reasoning, verbal reasoning and processing speed, or try the free pattern recognition test.
Curious which celebrity IQs near 160 hold up? Read the full stories of Einstein's IQ, Isaac Newton's IQ, Nikola Tesla's IQ, Stephen Hawking's IQ, Bill Gates' IQ, Elon Musk's IQ, Garry Kasparov's IQ and Terence Tao's IQ.
Our free test takes about 25 minutes and gives an estimated IQ with its percentile. Results go up to 145, so a score like 160 can only be confirmed by a psychologist.
Take the free IQ testPortraits are pencil-style sketches by Assessivo, based on: Michelangelo after a portrait attributed to Daniele da Volterra (about 1545), public domain. René Descartes after Frans Hals (1649), public domain. Albert Einstein from a 1921 photograph by Ferdinand Schmutzer, public domain. Stephen Hawking sketch based on a photo by Jim Campbell/Aero-News Network, CC BY 3.0. Bill Gates from a 2018 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services photograph, public domain.