NFL Passer Rating Calculator
Calculate NFL passer rating using the official four-component formula based on completion percentage, yards per attempt, touchdown rate, and interception rate. Use it to compare quarterback performance across games, seasons, and eras using the league's longest-standing efficiency metric.
Last updated: May 2026
Compare with similar
About this calculator
The NFL passer rating formula combines four passing stats normalized to a 0-2.375 scale, then converts to a 0-158.3 scale. The four components: a = (completion% − 30%) × 0.05 = ((COMP/ATT − 0.3) × 5); b = (yards per attempt − 3) × 0.25; c = (TD/ATT) × 20; d = 2.375 − (INT/ATT) × 25. Each component is capped: minimum 0, maximum 2.375. The final rating: ((a + b + c + d) / 6) × 100. The maximum possible rating is 158.3, achieved by a "perfect game" where all four components hit their 2.375 cap simultaneously — requiring 77.5% completion rate, 12.5+ yards per attempt, 11.875%+ TD rate, and zero interceptions over the game. The minimum is 0, when all four components are zero. Edge cases: zero attempts produces division by zero in three of the four components; very small samples produce extreme ratings that don't reflect quarterback skill. The formula was created in 1973 by NFL statistician Don Smith using historical data to set the component weights — completion percentage, yards per attempt, and TD rate are positively weighted; interceptions are negatively weighted. League-average passer rating in modern NFL is around 90-95; elite QBs sustain 100+; top single-season ratings have approached 130 (Aaron Rodgers' 122.5 in 2011 and 121.5 in 2020 are historical highs). The formula has known limitations: it doesn't account for sack-yards lost (those don't affect the calculation), doesn't reward QB rushing yards or TDs, doesn't weight passes by difficulty (a 50-yard pass and a 5-yard pass count the same in YPA), and rewards short safe passes over more impactful longer attempts. ESPN's QBR (Total Quarterback Rating) addresses these limitations by using play-by-play expected points data; pro analytics still report both because passer rating has decades of historical context.
How to use
Example 1 — Strong individual game. A QB went 24 for 32 passing for 320 yards, 3 TDs, 1 INT. COMP% = 24/32 = 75%. YPA = 320/32 = 10.0. TD% = 3/32 = 9.375%. INT% = 1/32 = 3.125%. Computing components: a = (0.75 − 0.3) × 5 = 2.25; b = (10.0 − 3) × 0.25 = 1.75; c = (0.09375) × 20 = 1.875; d = 2.375 − (0.03125) × 25 = 1.594. Sum = 7.469. Rating = (7.469 / 6) × 100 ≈ 124.5. ✓ A 124.5 rating is excellent — elite single-game performance, comfortably above the 100 threshold for "great" and approaching career-best individual game territory. Example 2 — Poor performance. A QB went 18 for 35 for 195 yards, 1 TD, 3 INTs. COMP% = 51.4%. YPA = 5.57. TD% = 2.86%. INT% = 8.57%. Components: a = (0.514 − 0.3) × 5 = 1.071; b = (5.57 − 3) × 0.25 = 0.643; c = 0.0286 × 20 = 0.571; d = 2.375 − 0.0857 × 25 = 0.232. Sum = 2.517. Rating = (2.517 / 6) × 100 ≈ 41.9. ✓ A 41.9 rating is well below the NFL average of ~90 — three interceptions and a poor yards-per-attempt drag the rating down dramatically. Note how heavily interceptions penalize the rating: each INT in a game can reduce passer rating by 15+ points, which is the formula's strongest signal that protecting the football matters more than aggressive throws.
Frequently asked questions
What is the maximum possible passer rating?
158.3, achieved when all four components hit their 2.375 caps simultaneously. The component caps require: completion percentage ≥ 77.5% (achieved when (COMP% − 0.3) × 5 = 2.375); yards per attempt ≥ 12.5 (achieved when (YPA − 3) × 0.25 = 2.375); TD percentage ≥ 11.875% (achieved when TD/ATT × 20 = 2.375); INT percentage = 0% (the d component starts at 2.375 and only decreases as INTs accumulate). A "perfect game" — 158.3 rating — has been achieved many times in NFL history (often by QBs with 12-15 attempts on short scoring drives), but never sustained over a full game with high volume because hitting all four caps simultaneously requires both efficiency and explosive plays. The all-time single-game record was set by Phil Simms in Super Bowl XXI at 150.9 (22/25 for 268 yards, 3 TDs, 0 INTs). Single-season records sit around 122-130 — Aaron Rodgers (122.5 in 2011, 121.5 in 2020), Peyton Manning (121.1 in 2004), Tom Brady (117.2 in 2007) headline the top season-long ratings.
What is the difference between passer rating and QBR?
Passer rating is the formula computed from box-score stats (completions, attempts, yards, TDs, INTs) only. QBR (ESPN's Total Quarterback Rating) is a play-by-play metric that uses expected-points-added data to evaluate each pass attempt based on game situation, field position, down-and-distance, and outcome. QBR includes QB rushing (passer rating doesn't), accounts for sack-yards lost (passer rating doesn't), evaluates passes by difficulty and situation (a 5-yard pass on 4th-and-3 is more valuable than a 5-yard pass on 3rd-and-15), and incorporates clutch performance (yards in late-game tight situations matter more). QBR is reported on a 0-100 scale where 50 is league average. The two metrics often agree but can diverge significantly — a QB with great passer rating but who fumbles often, takes sacks, or accumulates yards in garbage time will have a lower QBR than passer rating suggests. For modern analytics, QBR is often considered more representative of QB impact; for historical comparison and continuity, passer rating remains the longest-running standard.
Why does the passer rating formula use specific constants like 0.3, 3, 20, 25?
The constants come from the 1973 NFL statistical committee's decision to set each component's scale such that the league's historical average produced a rating around 66.7 and the all-time-best single seasons of the time produced ratings near 100. Specifically: the 0.3 baseline in component a means a 30% completion rate produces 0 contribution (anything less is capped at 0); the 3 baseline in component b means a 3 YPA produces 0 contribution; the multipliers (5, 0.25, 20, 25) ensure each component contributes proportionally to its statistical importance based on 1960s-70s NFL passing data. The constants were calibrated for the passing environment of the early 1970s when completion percentages were lower (40-55% was normal) and yards per attempt were higher. The modern NFL has shifted significantly toward shorter, more efficient passing — average completion percentage is now around 65% league-wide vs. 50% in the 1970s, so modern ratings tend to be higher across the board. The 158.3 maximum has not changed since 1973; the constants are essentially "frozen" historical artifacts that make modern QBs look better than they would by 1970s standards.
What are the most common mistakes people make with passer rating?
The biggest is comparing modern QBs against pre-1980s eras without context — passing environments have shifted dramatically (more pass-friendly rules, better receiver pads/protections, sophisticated scheme design), inflating modern ratings. Dan Marino's legendary 1984 season (108.9 rating) would be roughly league-average production today. The second is using single-game passer rating to evaluate sustained skill; small samples produce extreme values. The third is over-weighting passer rating in QB evaluation while ignoring sack rate, fumble rate, and rushing contribution (Lamar Jackson's rushing value isn't captured by passer rating). The fourth is comparing across game scripts — a QB in a blowout might have a low rating from late-game garbage attempts when the team is throwing on every down. The fifth is criticizing the formula's rewarding of "checkdown" passes; the formula does favor high completion percentage on short passes over aggressive longer throws with risk of incompletion or interception. The sixth is forgetting that defense, weather, and play-calling all affect passer rating beyond QB skill. For comprehensive QB analysis, use passer rating alongside QBR, completion percentage over expectation (CPOE), and EPA per play (expected points added).
When should I not use passer rating?
Skip it for cross-era QB comparisons without era-adjustment — modern league passing environment is much more pass-friendly than pre-1980s NFL, so raw rating numbers aren't directly comparable. It is the wrong tool for evaluating mobile QBs whose rushing contributions matter (Lamar Jackson, Josh Allen, Justin Fields) — passer rating doesn't capture rushing yards or rushing TDs. Do not use it for evaluating QBs in different schemes; a QB running a quick-passing offense (Bill Walsh tree, modern Chiefs) will have higher completion percentage and lower YPA than a QB in a vertical-shot offense (Mike Martz, Air Coryell), affecting the rating in ways unrelated to skill. For young QBs with limited sample size (under 10 starts), passer rating is unreliable and overemphasizing it can mislead evaluation. For team-level offensive analysis, use offensive EPA per play, success rate, or DVOA rather than aggregating QB passer ratings. For real-time game analysis, QBR's play-by-play context is more useful than the box-score-based passer rating. Finally, passer rating doesn't capture clutch performance, late-game adjustments, or 4th-quarter rallies — separate metrics like 4QC (4th-quarter comebacks) and GWD (game-winning drives) supplement passer rating for clutch evaluation.