The short answer
Yes. On modern IQ tests the average is 100 and the standard deviation is 15, so 130 is two standard deviations above average. That is about the 97.7th percentile: roughly 1 person in 44 scores 130 or higher. Wechsler tests have long labeled 130 and above as the top band, and it is close to Mensa's top 2% threshold.
On this page
A score of 130 is the point where most psychologists stop saying "above average" and start saying "very high". It is not a genius score, and it is not a guarantee of anything, but it is genuinely uncommon.
This guide explains exactly how uncommon, where the numbers come from, and why the same level of ability can show up as 130 on one test and 148 on another. It also covers the part most score pages skip: every IQ score comes with a margin of error.
Where 130 sits on the bell curve
Modern IQ tests are built so that scores in the population follow a normal distribution (the bell curve). The test makers fix the average at 100 and the standard deviation at 15. The standard deviation is simply the typical distance of a score from the average.
Once those two numbers are fixed, everything else is arithmetic. A score of 130 is 30 points above 100, which is exactly two standard deviations. On a normal curve, about 97.7% of people fall below that point and about 2.3% fall at or above it. That is roughly 1 person in 44.
IQ 130 on the bell curve
Mean 100, standard deviation 15
97.7thpercentile: higher than 97.7% of people
2.3%score this high or higher, about 1 in 44
In practice, that means a typical school year group of 90 children would contain about two who would score 130 or more on a full test. A town of 10,000 adults would contain about 230.
You can check any other score with the IQ percentile calculator, or read the dedicated page for an IQ of 130.
IQ score bands, percentiles and rarity
The table below is computed directly from the normal curve with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15. The descriptive labels are the ones used in the WAIS-IV manual, which were the standard Wechsler labels for adults for more than a decade.
| IQ | Standard deviations from 100 | Percentile | Share scoring this high or higher | WAIS-IV label |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 85 | minus 1.0 | 15.9th | 84.1% | Low average |
| 100 | 0 | 50th | 50% (1 in 2) | Average |
| 115 | plus 1.0 | 84.1st | 15.9% (1 in 6) | High average |
| 120 | plus 1.33 | 90.9th | 9.1% (1 in 11) | Superior |
| 125 | plus 1.67 | 95.2nd | 4.8% (1 in 21) | Superior |
| 130 | plus 2.0 | 97.7th | 2.3% (1 in 44) | Very superior |
| 135 | plus 2.33 | 99.0th | 0.98% (1 in 102) | Very superior |
| 140 | plus 2.67 | 99.6th | 0.38% (1 in 261) | Very superior |
| 145 | plus 3.0 | 99.87th | 0.13% (1 in 741) | Very superior |
| 150 | plus 3.33 | 99.96th | 0.04% (1 in 2,330) | Very superior |
A few things stand out. First, the gaps grow fast at the top. Going from 115 to 130 takes you from 1 in 6 to 1 in 44, but going from 130 to 145 takes you to 1 in 741. Second, the WAIS-IV puts everyone from 130 upwards in one band. The test is not designed to make fine distinctions far out in the tail, because very few people in its norm sample score there.
The newer WAIS-5 (2024) uses different wording. Pearson's sample WAIS-5 report describes a Full Scale IQ of 111 as "above average" and an index score of 124 as "very high", for example. The numbers mean the same thing; only the words have changed. For the bands either side of 130 see IQ 115, IQ 120, IQ 125, IQ 140 and IQ 145.
Is 130 "gifted" or "genius"?
Neither word has one official definition, which is why you will see 130 described both ways online.
Gifted. Some school gifted programs use a cut-off around 130, often alongside other evidence such as achievement and teacher reports. Policies differ by country, state and school, so a score of 130 does not automatically qualify anyone for anything.
Genius. Psychologists rarely use this word as a score category. Lewis Terman's 1916 classification used "near genius or genius" for scores above 140, but modern manuals do not have a "genius" band.
Mensa. Mensa admits people who score in the top 2% on an approved, supervised test. On a scale with a standard deviation of 15, the exact 98th percentile is about 131. American Mensa's published table accepts a full-scale IQ of 130 on the Wechsler tests and on the Stanford-Binet 5. So 130 is right at the edge of qualifying, and on a supervised test it can be enough.
One ability, three numbers: SD 15, SD 16 and SD 24
Not every test uses a standard deviation of 15. That is the single most common source of confusion about IQ numbers.
Older editions of the Stanford-Binet used a standard deviation of 16. Some Cattell tests report scores with a standard deviation of 24. The average is 100 in every case, but the scores spread out further on the wider scales, so the same person gets a bigger number.
| Percentile | SD 15 (Wechsler, SB5) | SD 16 (older Stanford-Binet) | SD 24 (Cattell) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 84.1st | 115 | 116 | 124 |
| 97.7th | 130 | 132 | 148 |
| 99.87th | 145 | 148 | 172 |
This is why American Mensa's qualifying scores look inconsistent at first glance: 130 on a Wechsler test, 132 on the older Stanford-Binet and 148 on the Cattell. They are all the same two standard deviations above the mean. A Cattell 148 is the same level as 130, not a higher one.
To convert, work out how many standard deviations above 100 the score is, then multiply by the other scale's standard deviation. A Cattell 148 is 48 points above 100. Divide by 24 to get 2.0, then multiply by 15 to get 30. That gives 130.
Every IQ score has a margin of error
No test measures anyone perfectly. Psychologists express this with the standard error of measurement (SEM), which depends on how reliable the test is. The more reliable the test, the smaller the SEM.
Full-scale scores on major individual tests such as the WAIS are very reliable, and their SEM is around 3 points. A 95% confidence interval stretches about two SEMs either way, so it ends up roughly 5 to 6 points above and below the score. Pearson's sample WAIS-5 report shows exactly this: a Full Scale IQ of 111 is reported with a 95% confidence interval of 106 to 116 and an SEM of 3.
Applied to 130, a well-administered full test would typically report a band of roughly 125 to 135. That is why a psychologist will not treat 128 and 131 as meaningfully different, and why a single point above or below a cut-off is not something to read much into. The IQ confidence interval tool lets you see the band for any score.
Why an online 130 is not the same as a clinical 130
A score from a full Wechsler or Stanford-Binet assessment has three things behind it: a large, representative norm sample tested in controlled conditions; a trained examiner; and a test that samples several kinds of ability, from vocabulary to working memory and processing speed.
Most online tests have none of these. Many are short, measure only one or two kinds of reasoning, and convert raw scores to the IQ scale with a formula rather than with norms collected from a representative sample. Some inflate scores to make people feel good. So a "130" from a website is, at best, a rough estimate of how you did on that set of puzzles.
The LifeScore IQ test is honest about which kind it is. It is a 25-question online visual reasoning test, timed at about 12 minutes, covering pattern recognition, spatial reasoning, logical sequences, analogies and rule application. The score is a simplified conversion onto the IQ scale (mean 100, SD 15). It is not age-adjusted, not norm-referenced against a representative sample and not a clinical assessment, so treat any number it gives you as an estimate. If you want a figure you can rely on for a decision, such as school placement or a Mensa application, you need a supervised test.
What 130 does and does not tell you
IQ scores predict some things well at the level of groups. People with higher scores tend, on average, to do better in school, stay in education longer and work in more complex jobs, a pattern summarized in the American Psychological Association's 1996 task force report on intelligence. Those are averages across many people, with a great deal of overlap.
What a score of 130 does not tell you is whether a particular person will be successful, creative, kind, wise or happy. It says nothing about motivation, conscientiousness, emotional skills or specific talents such as music. Plenty of people with a score of 130 have unremarkable careers, and plenty of people without one do outstanding work.
The fair summary is this: 130 is a high score that reflects strong reasoning on the kinds of tasks IQ tests sample. It is uncommon, but not extraordinarily rare, and it is one measurement with a margin of error, not a final verdict.
Questions people ask
What percentile is an IQ of 130?
About the 97.7th percentile on a test with a standard deviation of 15. Around 2.3% of people score 130 or higher, which is roughly 1 in 44.
Is 130 IQ enough for Mensa?
It can be. Mensa takes the top 2%, and American Mensa accepts a Wechsler or Stanford-Binet 5 full-scale IQ of 130. You need a score from an approved, supervised test, not an online quiz.
Is 130 a genius IQ?
No. There is no official genius band in modern test manuals. On the WAIS-IV, 130 and above is labeled "very superior", and newer editions use plainer wording for the same band.
Why do some tests say 148 when others say 130?
They use different scales. A score of 148 on a Cattell test (standard deviation 24) is the same level as 130 on a Wechsler test (standard deviation 15). Both are two standard deviations above the average.
How much can an IQ score of 130 vary?
On a full professional test the 95% confidence interval is usually about plus or minus 5 to 6 points, so roughly 125 to 135. On short online tests the uncertainty is larger and usually not reported.
References
- Pearson (2024). WAIS-5 sample score report (Full Scale IQ with 95% confidence interval and SEM).
- Wechsler, D. (2008). WAIS-IV Technical and Interpretive Manual. San Antonio, TX: Pearson.
- Terman, L. M. (1916). The Measurement of Intelligence. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
- American Mensa. Qualifying test scores.
- Neisser, U., et al. (1996). Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns. American Psychologist, 51(2), 77-101.
- Winter, E. L., Trudel, S. M., & Kaufman, A. S. (2024). Wait, where's the Flynn effect on the WAIS-5? Journal of Intelligence, 12(11), 118.



