Most cyclists have tested their FTP at least once. Far fewer know what to do with the number once they have it. The figure means something in isolation, but it means a great deal more when you set it against riders of similar age, weight, and experience.
This page gives you the benchmarks. The tables draw on the classification framework Andrew Coggan and Hunter Allen established in Training and Racing with a Power Meter, cross-referenced with data discussed on the Roadman Cycling Podcast and Joe Friel's work on masters performance. These are not lab values from professional riders. They are practical ranges that reflect what real cyclists at various stages of development actually produce.
One caveat before the tables: a raw FTP number without body weight is half the story. Read through to the W/kg section before drawing conclusions.
How to read FTP benchmarks
FTP — functional threshold power — is the highest average power you can sustain for approximately 60 minutes. If you are not sure how it is measured or how training zones are derived from it, the what is FTP glossary entry covers the full definition.
Benchmark tables are population summaries. They describe where riders typically sit, not where you should aim. A 52-year-old male at 3.8 W/kg is not performing poorly just because a benchmark table puts that figure in a category labelled "competitive" rather than "elite". Context determines what a number means.
Two variables matter most when reading these tables: sex and body weight. Male and female cyclists have different absolute FTP ranges because of differences in muscle mass and haemoglobin levels, but the W/kg benchmarks converge more closely. The tables below separate absolute watts by sex where it matters, and the W/kg table applies broadly to both.
Age group matters too, but perhaps less than most riders assume. Decline is real but gradual in trained athletes. The bigger variable is usually training history and volume, not the number on your birth certificate.
FTP benchmarks by age group
These absolute watt ranges assume a rider of average weight for each category: roughly 75–80 kg for men and 60–65 kg for women. If you are significantly lighter or heavier, the W/kg table in the next section will give you a better read.
Male FTP by age group (watts)
| Age | Recreational | Club/Trained | Competitive Amateur | Elite Amateur | |-----|-------------|-------------|--------------------|----| | 20–29 | 160–210 | 230–280 | 290–340 | 350–400 | | 30–39 | 155–205 | 225–275 | 285–335 | 340–390 | | 40–49 | 150–195 | 215–265 | 270–315 | 320–370 | | 50–59 | 140–185 | 200–250 | 255–295 | 300–345 | | 60+ | 125–170 | 180–230 | 235–270 | 275–315 |
Female FTP by age group (watts)
| Age | Recreational | Club/Trained | Competitive Amateur | Elite Amateur | |-----|-------------|-------------|--------------------|----| | 20–29 | 115–155 | 165–205 | 215–255 | 265–305 | | 30–39 | 112–152 | 160–200 | 210–248 | 258–298 | | 40–49 | 108–148 | 155–192 | 200–238 | 248–285 | | 50–59 | 100–140 | 146–185 | 188–222 | 232–268 | | 60+ | 90–128 | 132–170 | 172–205 | 215–248 |
The decline across decades is approximately 1% per year in consistently training athletes. Joe Friel's work on masters cyclists documents that riders who maintain structured training and adequate strength work preserve a far larger proportion of their peak FTP than those who simply ride without progression. The drop between a well-trained 40-year-old and a well-trained 55-year-old is typically 10–15%, not the 30–40% many assume.
FTP benchmarks by experience level
Raw years on the bike matter less than structured training years. A rider with ten years of unstructured riding will often test lower than a rider with three years of periodised training. The categories below describe training maturity, not calendar age.
Beginner (0–18 months structured training): Male 150–210W, Female 110–155W. This is where most people enter, and gains are fastest here. Consistent aerobic work and some intensity will push most beginners through this bracket within a season.
Recreational (1.5–4 years, irregular structure): Male 200–250W, Female 145–185W. Riders in this bracket ride regularly but do not follow a structured plan. They are fit but not trained in the technical sense.
Club/Trained (3–7 years, structured training): Male 240–300W, Female 175–220W. This is the largest bracket for committed amateur cyclists. Periodised training, consistent volume, and some high-intensity work define this group. Prof. Stephen Seiler's research on polarised training shows that the athletes who progress most reliably in this bracket spend 80% of their time at low intensity and concentrate hard efforts into the remaining 20%.
Competitive Amateur (5–12 years, periodised and race-focused): Male 290–345W, Female 215–260W. These riders race, train with intent, and test regularly. W/kg at this level typically sits between 3.8 and 4.5 for men, 3.4 and 4.1 for women.
Elite Amateur/Semi-Pro (8+ years, high volume, professional coaching): Male 340–400W+, Female 255–310W+. At this level, talent and training history compound. Reaching and sustaining these figures requires years of base, a high training load, and usually a structured strength programme.
W/kg benchmarks (the number that matters more)
Two riders can both test at 270W. If one weighs 65 kg and the other weighs 85 kg, their performance on any climb looks completely different. W/kg — watts per kilogram of body weight — normalises FTP across body sizes and is the standard metric used in professional and amateur racing worldwide. Use the W/kg calculator to work out your own figure.
W/kg benchmarks for male cyclists:
| Category | W/kg | |----------|------| | Untrained/beginner | 1.5–2.5 | | Recreational | 2.5–3.2 | | Club/Trained | 3.2–4.0 | | Competitive Amateur | 4.0–4.5 | | Elite Amateur | 4.5–5.2 | | Domestic Pro | 5.2–5.8 | | World Tour | 5.8–7.0 |
W/kg benchmarks for female cyclists:
| Category | W/kg | |----------|------| | Untrained/beginner | 1.3–2.2 | | Recreational | 2.2–2.8 | | Club/Trained | 2.8–3.5 | | Competitive Amateur | 3.5–4.1 | | Elite Amateur | 4.1–4.8 | | Domestic Pro | 4.8–5.4 | | World Tour | 5.4–6.2 |
The Coggan/Allen classification framework uses five categories (untrained through Cat 1/elite amateur) and the numbers above broadly reflect those ranges. The World Tour figures are context, not targets. Dan Lorang has spoken publicly about the physiological demands at Red Bull-Bora-Hansgrohe and the gap between a strong amateur and a Grand Tour contender is not simply a matter of training more. Genetics, years of accumulated load, and altitude exposure all contribute.
For most club riders, the meaningful range to focus on is 3.0–4.5 W/kg. Progressing through that range is achievable with structured training, adequate nutrition, and a realistic timeline.
How fast can you improve?
Beginners improve fastest. That is not a motivational claim; it is a reflection of how adaptation works. The physiological headroom is largest when you are farthest from your ceiling.
In the first 12 months of structured training, a previously untrained rider can realistically improve FTP by 20–30%. That rate slows considerably after year two. Trained club riders with consistent training history improve 5–10% in a productive season. Beyond five years of structured work, gains come in smaller increments: 2–5% annually is realistic, and many experienced riders plateau or fluctuate rather than trend upward year on year.
Several variables influence rate of improvement:
Training load: Volume and intensity must increase progressively. Doing the same rides week after week produces adaptation and then stagnation. Andrew Coggan's work on training stress establishes that chronic training load must rise over time for performance to follow.
Intensity distribution: Prof. Seiler's polarised training research consistently shows that athletes who concentrate the majority of their volume at genuinely low intensity, and keep hard efforts hard, improve more reliably than those who default to a moderate-intensity "grey zone" for most rides.
Strength training: Both Joe Friel and Dan Lorang have noted that strength work, particularly in the off-season, supports power maintenance and improves neuromuscular efficiency. For masters riders especially, two strength sessions per week significantly slows the age-related FTP decline.
Nutrition: Carbohydrate availability during hard sessions is a rate-limiter. Asker Jeukendrup's research on multiple transportable carbohydrates shows that gut-trained athletes can absorb 90–120g of carbohydrate per hour, which directly supports high-quality training sessions and therefore adaptation.
Once you have your FTP benchmark, plug your number into the FTP zone calculator to set training zones and build sessions around accurate effort levels. Training in the wrong zone — which is common when zones are set from population averages rather than your individual FTP — is one of the most common reasons improvement stalls.
When benchmarks stop mattering
There is a point in every rider's development when comparing your FTP to a population table produces diminishing returns. That point comes earlier than most people think.
Benchmarks are useful for two things: establishing where you are relative to peers, and identifying whether you are broadly on track in the early stages of training. Once you are training with a structured programme and testing regularly, the more important comparison is against your own previous results.
A 47-year-old rider who improves from 3.1 to 3.4 W/kg over 18 months has made a genuinely significant physiological change. The fact that a benchmark table places 3.4 W/kg in a "club/trained" bracket rather than a "competitive" bracket tells them very little. What matters is the trajectory and the process generating it.
The same logic applies to age-related decline. If you test at 3.2 W/kg at 58 and the benchmark for your age group peaks at 3.4 W/kg in the elite amateur band, you are not "nearly elite". You are measuring against a population summary. The useful question is whether your training, nutrition, and recovery are actually optimised — and most riders find they are not.
This is where the individual coaching model matters. The Roadman Cycling Not Done Yet programme works across five pillars — training, nutrition, strength, recovery, and accountability — because FTP is an output of all five, not just the training column. Riders who plateau on benchmark tables almost always have a gap in one of the other four pillars.
The concrete next step is this: test your FTP properly (a 20-minute test using 95% of average power, or a ramp test calibrated to your trainer), calculate your W/kg using the W/kg calculator, and locate yourself honestly in the tables above. Then identify the single biggest variable holding your number back. For most riders it is not training volume. It is intensity distribution, carbohydrate intake during hard sessions, or the absence of a strength programme. Fix that variable first.