Daily protein, fat and carb grams from TDEE and goal.
· Daily target:
Protein 1.8–2.2 g/kg (ISSN 2018), fat 0.8–1.2 g/kg (ACSM), carbs fill the remaining calories. Adjust ±20 % for individual response.
A daily calorie target is half a diet plan. The other half is how those calories are distributed between protein, fat, and carbohydrate — the three macronutrients that supply all of human caloric intake. Macro composition decides how full you feel between meals (protein and fibre satiate; refined carbs do not), how much muscle you keep when cutting (protein protects lean mass; calories alone do not), how well you train (carbs fuel high-intensity work; fats fuel long aerobic work), and even how steady your energy levels feel through the day. Two people eating the exact same 2 200 kcal — one with 60 g of protein and 350 g of carbs, the other with 180 g of protein and 200 g of carbs — will have visibly different physiques, performance, and adherence after eight weeks. This calculator takes a daily energy figure (TDEE), a goal (cut, maintain, lean bulk), and a body weight, and returns the protein, fat, and carb gram targets that hit the calorie number while satisfying the per-kilogram protein and fat floors that the sports-nutrition literature has converged on. The output drops directly into MyFitnessPal, Cronometer, or any other tracking app as the day's targets.
Protein and fat are scaled by body weight; carbs fill the remaining calories. Protein: 2.2 g per kg of body weight when cutting (to spare lean mass under a deficit), 1.8 g per kg when maintaining or bulking (the ISSN 2018 lower-bound recommendation for trained populations). Fat: 0.9 g per kg when cutting, 1.0 g per kg otherwise (above the 0.6 g per kg floor that the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics flags as essential for hormone production). Carbs: (target calories − protein kcal − fat kcal) / 4. Target calories themselves depend on goal: TDEE − 500 for cut, TDEE for maintain, TDEE + 300 for lean bulk. Each gram of protein and carb supplies 4 kcal; each gram of fat supplies 9 kcal. The percentages displayed in the result panel are the fraction of total calories from each macronutrient; the absolute gram counts are what matter for the meal plan, but the percentages are useful for sanity checks (a typical cut runs 35–40 % protein, 25–30 % fat, 30–40 % carbs; a maintenance plan tilts more carb-heavy).
Three inputs: TDEE in kcal/day, goal (cut, maintain, lean bulk), and body weight (kg or lb). Plug in your maintenance number from the calorie-needs calculator on this site, or your own measured maintenance from ten days of weight tracking. Pick the goal that matches the next 8 to 12 weeks of your training. The result panel shows the daily target calories (after applying the cut/maintain/bulk offset), the protein/fat/carb grams as the three large KPIs, and the percentage of total calories each macro supplies. Default inputs — 2 400 kcal, maintain, 75 kg — represent a typical European adult man at moderate activity.
A 75 kg man at TDEE 2 400 kcal, maintain: protein = 1.8 × 75 = 135 g (540 kcal); fat = 1.0 × 75 = 75 g (675 kcal); carbs = (2 400 − 540 − 675) / 4 = 1 185 / 4 = 296 g (1 184 kcal). Percentages: 22 % protein, 28 % fat, 50 % carbs — a balanced maintenance plan. Switch the goal to cut at the same weight: target calories drop to 1 900; protein rises to 2.2 × 75 = 165 g (660 kcal, 35 %); fat drops to 0.9 × 75 = 67.5 g (608 kcal, 32 %); carbs become (1 900 − 660 − 608) / 4 = 158 g (633 kcal, 33 %). Notice protein went up while calories went down — exactly the protective adjustment recommended for a cut. Now consider a 90 kg lifter on a lean bulk at TDEE 3 200: target = 3 500 kcal; protein = 1.8 × 90 = 162 g (648 kcal); fat = 1.0 × 90 = 90 g (810 kcal); carbs = (3 500 − 648 − 810) / 4 = 511 g (2 044 kcal). Percentages: 19 % protein, 23 % fat, 58 % carbs — a high-carb composition that supports heavy training and glycogen replenishment.
First, hitting the calorie number while ignoring the macro split. The scale will move on calories alone, but the body composition under the scale depends on the macros. A 1 000 kcal daily deficit at 0.5 g/kg protein loses muscle as fast as fat; the same deficit at 2.2 g/kg protein loses mostly fat. Second, going below the fat floor. Fat intake under 0.6 g per kg sustained for weeks is associated with reduced testosterone in men and menstrual disruption in women. The 0.9–1.0 g/kg used here is comfortably above that floor. Third, treating the carbs number as a target rather than a remainder. Under cut conditions, carbs simply absorb whatever calories are left after protein and fat are nailed; the absolute number is less important than the protein and fat figures. Fourth, using these numbers for endurance athletes. Marathoners, long-distance cyclists, and triathletes need much higher carbohydrate intake (5–10 g/kg, often 60–70 % of total calories) than the calculator returns; the formula is calibrated for general fitness and resistance training, not endurance work. Fifth, picking goals based on aspiration rather than reality. "Lean bulk" only works if the lifter is actually progressing in the gym; for someone who has been training under three years, the surplus often turns into half fat, half muscle, leaving the same body composition with extra weight.
Macro splits have evolved over the past two decades. Athletes' diet (1990s): 60 % carbs, 25 % fat, 15 % protein — the carb-loading era. Atkins / keto (2000s): < 50 g carbs/day, fat as the dominant macro. Zone (2000s): 40 % carb / 30 % fat / 30 % protein, marketed for body composition. Modern evidence-based (post-2015): protein 1.6–2.2 g/kg as the priority, fat 0.6 g/kg minimum, carbs filling remaining calories — no fixed percentage prescribed, the absolute grams matter. For endurance work, flexible periodisation matches carb intake to training load: 8 g/kg on hard training days, 3 g/kg on rest days. For physique competitors, carb cycling alternates high-, low-, and zero-carb days within a week to manage water weight near a contest. Plant-based athletes need 5–10 % more total protein to compensate for slightly lower digestibility of plant proteins. None of these replace the simple per-kg-body-weight floor approach used here, which gets the lifter 90 % of the result with 5 % of the complexity.