“I was wondering how my FTP compares against other riders. Will I be competitive with [insert value] W?”
I often get these questions from riders who wonder how they test results hold up against the competition.
So let us have a look at what FTP values are typically seen in different racing categories according to the fathers of the FTP concept. And let us also briefly discuss why you should not necessarily get too caught up in your FTP value.
Featured image: Radu Razvan/Shutterstock.com
What is Functional Threshold Power (FTP)?
Functional threshold power is a concept created by the authors Allen and Coggan. Their definition is as follows (1):
“FTP is the highest power that a rider can maintain in a quasi-steady state for approximately one hour without fatiguing.”
Allen & Coggan
With that definition in mind, the obvious way to determine your FTP would be to ride as hard as you can for 60 minutes and record your average power output.
However, several shorter protocols for estimating FTP exists. One of which is the 20 minute test (1). Whereby your average power over a 20 min maximal effort is multiplied by 0.95 to give your FTP estimate.
20 min W x 0.95 ≈ FTP *
* There are some caveats associated with this method, see below for further discussion.
How strong is your FTP?
Once your functional threshold power is in, you may wonder how it stacks up against the competition.
Andrew Coggan provides the below FTP values for different levels of riders. They do not explicitly account for how they derived at these numbers, so I can only assume it is compiled from athletes they have been working with over the years.
The first table below refers to male FTP values.
| Level of performance | FTP (in W/kg) |
| World class | 5,93 – 6,60 |
| Exceptional | 5,36 – 5,93 |
| Excellent | 4,79 – 5,36 |
| Very good | 4,22 – 4,79 |
| Good | 3,65 – 4,22 |
| Moderate | 3,08 – 3,65 |
| Fair | 2,51 – 3,08 |
| Novice 2 | 1,93 – 2,51 |
| Novice 1 | 1,27 – 1,93 |
Boost your FTP with a 9-week polarised plan framework
When you join the 6,421 cyclists on my newsletter, you’ll receive a 9-week plan framework and regular updates with actionable takeaways from cycling science. There is also scarce amounts of information about my paid services. I will take care not to clutter your inbox.
Enter your details below to get the plan.
The next table below refers to female FTP values.
| Level of performance | FTP (in W/kg) |
| World class | 5,10 – 5,69 |
| Exceptional | 4,60 – 5,10 |
| Excellent | 4,10 – 4,60 |
| Very good | 3,59 – 4,10 |
| Good | 3,09 – 3,59 |
| Moderate | 2,58 – 3,09 |
| Fair | 2,08 – 2,58 |
| Novice 2 | 1,59 – 2,08 |
| Novice 1 | 0,99 – 1,59 |
Now you got something to reach for heading into your next FTP test.
Caveats concerning Functional Threshold Power
Once you first get started in the sport of cycling, you very quickly hear a lot of talk about FTP values.
Not only does it serve as an estimate of overall cycling performance. It it also commonly used as a point of reference for exercise intensity.
Example: You may find training plans prescribing “Workout A should be performed with 20 minute warm-up at X percent of FTP, then 5 x 10 minute intervals at Y percent of FTP.”
This is where I would advice some due consideration.
The entire premise of prescribing exercise intensity based on an FTP value rests on the assumption that 100% of your FTP value represents your true “anaerobic threshold”. In other words, the tipping point where added intensity will inflict rapid lactate accumulation and become unsustainable over time.
However, know that there is considerable controversy surrounding how to best estimate this tipping point. Exercise scientists hardly ever use FTP in their methods, more commonly they will express exercise intensity by the use of VO2 measurements, critical power and lactate measurements.
The FTP test has indeed been compared to other methods for estimating “anaerobic threshold”. Shortly put, FTP appears to hold its own as a concept for estimating threshold power. At group level, the methods works reasonably well.
However, note that there are considerable individual differences in the accuracy by which the 20 minute FTP test estimates your threshold power (when compared to a 60 minute test or stepwise lactate profile test).
…it is difficult to accept FTP as a thoroughly valid concept. We found large limits of agreement between most variables, suggesting a high level of interindividual variability in the relationship between FTP20 vs. FTP60 and between both measurements vs. IAT (me: stepwise lactate profile test).
– Borszcz et al. Int J Sports Med 2018
I have previously written extensively about the pitfalls with FTP testing.
The take-away being that if you use FTP as the sole measure to guide your training intensity, you are running the risk of seriously over- or underestimating your intensity.
For this reason, it is good advice to apply a combined use of several intensity measures, such as heart rate, subjective feel (rate of perceived exertion), the “talk test” and if available to you – lactate measurements (although not required for most riders).
Cycling performance is more than Functional Threshold Power
There is no doubt that FTP provides a decent measure of your overall cycling performance.
However, the nature of cycling races is such that it requires a lot more from your body than to hold a high and steady power output for 60 minutes.
In road races, you need to ride for several hours at low intensity while burning as little glycogen as possible. You typically also need to be able to put out repeated bouts of high intensity efforts and recover from these. To then be able to deliver a strong finish in either sprint or a long-range attack.
Simply measuring your FTP will give you a rough idea about how your overall aerobic capacity develops as your training progresses. However, it will certainly not pick up all changes to the above physiological traits.
Therefore, be cautious about evaluating your progress based on your FTP results alone.
Your true performance is usually better represented by a battery of field tests across shorter and longer durations.
Excitingly, the last few years have produced a plethora of normative power data derived from high level and world class cyclists. It’s well worth a look to better understand where the different aspects of cycling performance comes from.
Best of luck improving your cycling power – and not just your FTP.
References:
- Allen H og Coggan A. Training and racing with a power meter. 2. utg. Velo Press, Boulder, Colorado 2010.
- Borszcz FK et al. Functional threshold power in cyclists: Validity of the concept and physiological responses. International Journal of Sports Medicine, 2018;39:737-742