The universal intensity currency
A MET — Metabolic Equivalent of Task — expresses an activity's energy cost as a multiple of quiet sitting. Sitting is 1 MET, defined as 1 kcal per kilogram of body weight per hour. Brisk walking is about 4.3 METs; running at 9.7 km/h is 9.8; sleeping is 0.95.
Every calories-burned calculator on the internet, including ours, runs the same formula: kcal = MET × weight (kg) × duration (hours). A 70 kg person cycling moderately (6.8 METs) for 45 minutes burns 6.8 × 70 × 0.75 ≈ 357 kcal.
Where the numbers come from
MET values are catalogued in the Compendium of Physical Activities, a research database first published in 1993 and most recently updated in 2024, assigning codes and measured energy costs to over 800 specific activities — from competitive boxing (12.8) to playing the accordion (1.8).
The values are population averages measured with indirect calorimetry, which is both their strength (standardised, comparable) and their limitation (your personal cost varies with fitness, technique and conditions).
Reading MET numbers wisely
METs measure gross expenditure — they include the ~1 MET you'd have burned resting anyway. Net extra burn from exercise is therefore MET − 1, a distinction that matters for honest deficit math.
Fitter individuals often burn slightly less at a given absolute workload (efficiency), while beginners burn more — treat published METs as the centre of a band, not a precise personal value.
Put it into practice: run your own numbers with the related calculator — free, instant, and nothing leaves your browser.
Frequently asked questions
What's a good MET level for exercise?
Public-health guidance classes 3–6 METs as moderate and 6+ as vigorous. Weekly targets are often expressed as MET-minutes: 500–1,000 MET-min/week covers the standard recommendation.
Why do calculators disagree on calories burned?
Different MET values for slightly different activity descriptions, plus gross-versus-net handling. Discrepancies of 10–20% between tools are normal.
Are fitness-tracker calories or MET calculations more accurate?
For steady activities they land in the same band. Trackers add heart-rate data, which helps for intervals but introduces its own large errors — neither is gospel.
More guides
- What Is TDEE?
- What Is BMR?
- Mifflin-St Jeor Calculator
- Harris-Benedict Calculator
- Katch-McArdle Calculator
- BMR vs TDEE: What's the Difference?
- What Is NEAT?
- The Thermic Effect of Food
- Activity Multipliers Explained
- What Is a Calorie?
- Metabolic Adaptation Explained
- The Calorie Deficit, Explained
- 500-Calorie Deficit
- 1,000-Calorie Deficit
- 300-Calorie Deficit
- How Many Calories to Lose 1 Pound a Week
- How Many Calories to Lose 2 Pounds a Week
- Reverse Dieting
- Maintenance Phase
- Calorie Cycling
- How Accurate Are TDEE Calculators?
- Not Losing Weight in a Calorie Deficit? 7 Real Reasons
- Is 1,200 Calories a Day Safe?
- Should You Eat Back Exercise Calories?
- How Long Does Metabolic Adaptation Last?
- Do You Burn Fewer Calories as You Lose Weight?
- Why Your Maintenance Calories Keep Changing
- Calorie Cycling vs Flat Deficit
- How to Avoid Muscle Loss on GLP-1 Medications
Sources
- Ainsworth BE, Haskell WL, Herrmann SD, et al. 2011 Compendium of Physical Activities: a second update of codes and MET values. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011. [link]