My IQ TestAverage IQ by Country: What the Data Can and Can't Show
National IQ averages are estimates compiled from many separate studies, not results of one global test. Developed countries typically cluster between about 95 and 105, but differences largely track schooling, health and test familiarity, and the data quality varies a lot.
Where national IQ figures come from
Almost every widely shared country ranking traces back to datasets compiled by Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen, later updated by David Becker. They gathered published studies — often of school children or small convenience samples — and converted the results onto a common scale with the UK set at 100.
That method has drawn serious criticism. Some national figures rest on a few hundred people, samples are rarely representative, and different tests have been merged. Researchers such as Jelte Wicherts have shown that more careful sample selection changes estimates for many countries by ten points or more.
Approximate averages for selected countries
The table shows rounded estimates often cited for higher-income countries. Treat each figure as having a wide margin of uncertainty.
| Country | Estimated average | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | ≈104–106 | Consistently high in multiple datasets |
| South Korea | ≈102–106 | Strong education outcomes (PISA) |
| Singapore | ≈104–108 | Small, well-studied samples |
| Germany | ≈99–102 | Large normative samples |
| Netherlands | ≈100–101 | Well documented Flynn effect |
| United Kingdom | ≈99–100 | Reference point in the Lynn scale |
| United States | ≈97–99 | Norms of most major tests are US-based |
| France | ≈97–99 | Some studies suggest a recent decline |
| Canada | ≈99–100 | |
| Australia | ≈99–100 |
Why averages differ between countries
The most consistent predictors of national scores are years of quality schooling, childhood nutrition, the burden of infectious disease and familiarity with test formats. When those factors improve, scores rise — sometimes by several points per decade, which is the Flynn effect. That speed of change is hard to square with fixed genetic explanations.
For region-specific detail see our guides to average IQ in the United States, average IQ in the United Kingdom and average IQ across Europe.
How to use these numbers responsibly
Country averages describe large populations and say nothing about any individual. The spread within one country is far larger than the gap between most countries. Rankings are also easily misused to support prejudice, which is why reputable researchers stress caution.
If you are curious about your own reasoning ability, a personal estimate is far more meaningful than a national league table. You can take our free 20-minute IQ test to see where you stand.
Common questions
Which country has the highest average IQ?
East Asian countries such as Japan, Singapore and South Korea usually top compiled rankings, but differences among the top countries are within the margin of error.
Are national IQ rankings reliable?
Only loosely. Many figures rest on small or unrepresentative samples, and estimates for lower-income countries are especially uncertain.
Is the average IQ always 100?
Within the population a test was normed on, yes by definition. Other countries' averages are expressed relative to that reference group.
About the author
Dr. Elena Marsh — Elena has spent over a decade studying intelligence measurement and test construction, with a focus on fluid reasoning and fair item design.
Reviewed by Prof. Daniel Okafor — Daniel reviews item statistics and norming assumptions for our test and guides.
Sources and further reading
- Lynn, R., & Vanhanen, T. (2012). Intelligence: A Unifying Construct for the Social Sciences. Ulster Institute.
- Becker, D. (2019). The NIQ dataset (v1.3.3). viewoniq.org.
- Wicherts, J. M., Dolan, C. V., & van der Maas, H. L. J. (2010). A systematic literature review of the average IQ of sub-Saharan Africans. Intelligence, 38(1), 1–20.
- Pietschnig, J., & Voracek, M. (2015). One century of global IQ gains. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(3), 282–306.