focusage
Comparison · verified September 2026

FocusAge vs Human Benchmark

What each reaction time test actually measures, where Human Benchmark is still the better choice, and why your two scores will never quite match.

Short answer: both sites measure the same thing the same way — click the moment the colour changes, five times. Human Benchmark is the long-established default and the number most people quote, so keep using it when you want to compare with friends or the wider internet. FocusAge differs in three specific ways: it reports your median rather than an average, it can compare you against your own age group, and it publishes the methodology behind its benchmark numbers — including the fact that those numbers are not yet drawn from its own users.

Try ours first so the comparison below means something concrete.

Side-by-side comparison

Rows describing Human Benchmark reflect only what is observable by using their site. Where we cannot verify something we say so instead of guessing.

FeatureFocusAgeHuman Benchmark
Test typeSimple visual reaction time — click the moment the panel turns greenSimple visual reaction time — click the moment the colour changes
Trials per result55
FreeYesYes
Account requiredNoNo
Result shown immediatelyYesYes
Compared against other usersYes — against published 270 ms adult benchmarksYes — against their own community of previous visitors
Age-adjusted comparisonYes — optional age, compares you to your own age bandNo — age is not asked, so everyone is compared together
Consistency (spread between trials)Yes — standard deviation shown alongside your speedNot shown on the result screenBest of our knowledge — tell us if this has changed.
Published methodologyYes — including its stated limitationsNo public methodology pageBest of our knowledge — tell us if this has changed.
States where its benchmarks come fromYes — flagged as approximate, not yet drawn from our own usersNot publishedBest of our knowledge — tell us if this has changed.
Other tests availableReaction time plus a daily training suite built to move the numberAim trainer, verbal and visual memory, chimp test, typing and more
Been onlineNewWell over a decadeBest of our knowledge — tell us if this has changed.

Verified September 2026. Human Benchmark is running the same test it always has; if any row above is now out of date we would rather correct it than win the comparison.

Where Human Benchmark is genuinely better

Most comparison pages skip this part. It would be dishonest to, because for several common situations Human Benchmark is the right answer.

It is the number everyone recognises

If you want to post a result your friends can compare against, or quote something other people have heard of, use Human Benchmark. Being the standard is a real advantage and we cannot claim it.

A far larger pool of results

It has been online for well over a decade and is vastly more widely known, so the population your result is compared against is much bigger. Our own dataset is small — that is exactly why we label our benchmark numbers as approximations drawn from published research rather than pretending they came from our users.

More things to test in one place

Aim trainer, verbal and visual memory, chimp test, typing. If you want a battery of quick cognitive measures rather than one number, they offer considerably more breadth than we do today.

Less friction when you just want a number

Well done if all you need is one score in about twenty seconds and no explanation of where it came from. We deliberately show more context than that, which is not always what you want.

What FocusAge does differently

Four concrete design decisions, each of which is a trade-off rather than a pure improvement.

  1. 1.Median instead of mean

    One distracted trial — a notification, a sneeze, someone walking past — can swing a five-sample average by tens of milliseconds. Taking the median means that single bad trial simply drops out instead of dragging your published number. The trade-off: a median ignores how good your best try was, which is why we also show you every individual trial.

  2. 2.Optional age-adjusted comparison

    Reaction time slows by roughly 1–1.5 ms per year from your mid-twenties onward. If nobody's age is recorded, that effect gets folded into every comparison and you can't tell how much of your percentile is reflexes and how much is simply the age spread of whoever else took the test. If you give us your age we compare you against your own band; if you would rather not, we skip it and compare you to all adults.

  3. 3.Consistency, not just speed

    We show the spread between your five trials. Someone averaging 250 ms with a 12 ms spread has genuinely steady reflexes; someone averaging 250 ms with a 70 ms spread got lucky on one click. A single headline number hides that difference entirely.

  4. 4.Published methodology with stated limits

    Our benchmark currently puts the adult median at 270 ms. We publish how that is derived, and we state plainly that it comes from published research rather than our own logged attempts. That is a weaker claim than a site with millions of real results can make — we publish it anyway because it is the truth, and every number elsewhere in our reaction-time cluster traces back to that same disclosed source.

Why your score differs between the two sites

This is the part almost every comparison leaves out, and it matters more than any row in the table above: neither site measures your nervous system directly. Both measure your reaction time plus your equipment's delay, and those delays are not identical.

Display refresh interval

A 60 Hz monitor redraws every 16.7 ms, so the green panel can appear anywhere within that window before you even see it.

Input device polling

Wireless mice typically poll every 8–12 ms; a trackpad and its palm-rejection logic add more on top.

Browser paint and main thread

Background tabs, extensions and screen recorders all delay when the colour change actually reaches your screen.

What the timer listens for

Timing stops on mouse-down vs on click-release vs after a frame commits — each choice shifts every result by a few ms.

We have deliberately not put a number on how far apart the two scores typically land. Answering that properly means running both tests back to back on calibrated hardware, many times — and inventing a figure because it sounds plausible is exactly the habit this page criticises elsewhere. Expect a gap of tens of milliseconds; treat it as normal.

The practical rule: never compare a score from one site against a score from another. Pick one, use the same device, and compare yourself against yourself over time. That difference is real; the other one mostly measures your monitor.

Which one should you use?

Use Human Benchmark if

  • You want to compare results with friends or post something recognisable
  • You want a large battery of different cognitive tests in one place
  • You just need one number quickly and don't want the caveats

Use FocusAge if

  • You want a comparison that accounts for your age
  • You care whether your result is steady or just a lucky click
  • You want to know how the benchmark numbers were produced
  • You'd rather train the skill than just measure it once

Honestly, plenty of people should use both. They answer slightly different questions, and neither costs anything.

Frequently asked questions

Is FocusAge's reaction time test the same as Human Benchmark's?

Both measure simple visual reaction time in the same way: wait, the stimulus changes colour, you click, repeated five times. The number means the same physical thing on either site. What differs is the detail around it — we report the median rather than an average, we can compare you against your own age group, and we publish how our benchmark numbers are produced.

Why do I get a different reaction time on different websites?

Because each site adds its own stack of hardware and software delay between your brain and your score. Display refresh, mouse polling rate, what event the timer listens for and whether the result is an average or a median all differ slightly. A difference of tens of milliseconds between two sites on the same afternoon is normal and is not evidence that either one is broken.

Which reaction time test is the most accurate?

None of the free browser ones, in the strict sense. All of them measure your reaction plus your equipment's latency. If you want comparative accuracy, pick one site, use the same device at roughly the same time of day, and track your own trend over weeks. Comparing yourself against yourself is far more meaningful than comparing two different websites against each other.

Can I compare my Human Benchmark score with my FocusAge score?

Not directly — treat them as two separate measurements on two different instruments. They will not be identical even if your reflexes haven't changed. If you want one number for comparing with friends, use whichever site your friends use. If you want one number to track your own progress, pick a site and stick to it.

Do these tests measure real reaction time?

They measure real reaction time plus device latency. Nothing about the number is fake; it just isn't a pure measurement of your nervous system, because part of every millisecond belongs to your monitor and mouse. That is a limitation of browser-based testing generally, not of any one site.

Do I need an account to see my results?

No. Both tests are free and show your result on screen without signup. FocusAge also keeps a local, anonymous history on your device so you can see whether you are trending — nothing is uploaded and no email is required.

FocusAge is an independent project and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or connected to Human Benchmark. “Human Benchmark” is referred to here only to compare products. Details about it reflect publicly observable behaviour as of September 2026; if anything here is inaccurate we will correct it. Neither test is a medical or diagnostic assessment.