The Sitting-Rising Test: the standards by age and sex
Systematic-defined standard (never a published clinical cut-off) Scoring version healthspan_v2_2026_08. Red, yellow and green are Systematic standards, not published clinical cut-offs.
| Cohort | Red · Priority capacity | Yellow · Functional target | Green · Exceptional capacity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Female, 18–20 | ≤ 8.5 points | 9–10 points | No band |
| Female, 21–30 | ≤ 9 points | 9.5–10 points | No band |
| Female, 31–40 | ≤ 8.5 points | 9–10 points | No band |
| Female, 41–45 | ≤ 8 points | 8.5–10 points | No band |
| Female, 46–50 | ≤ 7.5 points | 8–9.5 points | ≥ 10 points |
| Female, 51–55 | ≤ 7 points | 7.5–9 points | ≥ 9.5 points |
| Female, 56–60 | ≤ 6.5 points | 7–8.5 points | ≥ 9 points |
| Female, 61–65 | ≤ 5 points | 5.5–8 points | ≥ 8.5 points |
| Female, 66–70 | ≤ 2.5 points | 3–7.5 points | ≥ 8 points |
| Female, 71–75 | ≤ 1 points | 1.5–5.5 points | ≥ 6 points |
| Female, 76–80 | No band | 0–3 points | ≥ 3.5 points |
| Female, 81–85 | No band | 0–2 points | ≥ 2.5 points |
| Female, 86+ | No band | 0–1 points | ≥ 1.5 points |
| Male, 18–20 | ≤ 8 points | 8.5–10 points | No band |
| Male, 21–25 | ≤ 8.5 points | 9–10 points | No band |
| Male, 26–30 | ≤ 8.5 points | 9–9.5 points | ≥ 10 points |
| Male, 31–40 | ≤ 8 points | 8.5–9.5 points | ≥ 10 points |
| Male, 41–45 | ≤ 7.5 points | 8–9.5 points | ≥ 10 points |
| Male, 46–50 | ≤ 7.5 points | 8–9 points | ≥ 9.5 points |
| Male, 51–60 | ≤ 7 points | 7.5–8.5 points | ≥ 9 points |
| Male, 61–65 | ≤ 6 points | 6.5–8 points | ≥ 8.5 points |
| Male, 66–70 | ≤ 4.5 points | 5–8 points | ≥ 8.5 points |
| Male, 71–75 | ≤ 2.5 points | 3–7.5 points | ≥ 8 points |
| Male, 76–80 | ≤ 0.5 points | 1–6 points | ≥ 6.5 points |
| Male, 81–85 | No band | 0–5 points | ≥ 5.5 points |
| Male, 86+ | No band | 0–3.5 points | ≥ 4 points |
Key numbers
6141 adults
Reference sample size
What Systematic recommends
Where to start
- Use a stable surface around standard household-chair height. Stand with your feet about shoulder-width apart and parallel. Maintain full barefoot contact with the floor and awareness of the tripod points of contact through each foot.
- Hold the 5–10 pound object in front of your sternum as a counterweight. Keep the counterweight under 10 pounds. Keep the elbows slightly bent.
- Lower toward the chair or target surface under control. Lightly touch the surface rather than sitting down fully. Stand all the way back up after each repetition. Take approximately 3 seconds to lower. Pause briefly at the bottom for about 1 second. Take approximately 3 seconds to return to standing.
Condensed from the published Development Pathway (The Sitting-Rising Test: Counterbalance Tempo Target Squat). This is a starting point, not a training program or medical advice.
Published reference scores and Systematic standards are different things
Araújo and colleagues published sitting-rising reference scores from 6141 adults, separately for men and women, in five-year age groups, split into quarters. Those quarters describe how the people in that study scored. They are not clinical cut-offs, and they are not Systematic's bands.
Systematic builds its bands on them. The bottom quarter of the reference becomes red, the middle two quarters become yellow, and the top quarter becomes green. That makes red, yellow and green Systematic standards, informed by the reference, rather than something the researchers set.
Why some groups show No band
In some age and sex groups the reference mapping does not yield a separate range for every band, so either the red or the green column shows No band. In the younger groups the published scores have no separate top quarter, because so many people scored near the top, so even a flawless score stays yellow. In the oldest groups, women 76 and over and men 81 and over, there is no separate red range. Systematic does not invent a missing threshold, and No band never means a result is invalid.
Left and right
Systematic tests both foot-forward positions. The better valid one is your result, and the difference between them is reported separately as an observation, not counted against you. No size of difference is currently labeled clinically significant or abnormal.
The evidence
Each cited source is labeled according to how it supports the particular claim on this page. Direct test evidence, underlying-capacity findings and population reference values are distinguished from Systematic-defined protocols and standards. Historical development notes are retained internally rather than presented as public evidence. A study of an underlying capacity is never presented as validation of the Systematic test itself.
-
Normative/reference evidence
Araújo et al. (2020; published online 2019). Sitting–rising test: Sex- and age-reference scores derived from 6141 adults. European Journal of Preventive Cardiology.
What it found. The study reported sitting-rising test sex- and age-reference scores derived from 6141 adults with separate male and female distributions, 15 five-year age intervals, and quartile bands.
What it does not show. Its quarters are not clinical cut-offs, and they say nothing about one person's health risk or lifespan.
The Systematic Healthspan Assessment is a physical baseline. It is not a diagnosis, and it does not estimate a biological age, a disease risk or a lifespan.