Get your LOVE REPORT
Do you truly love each other?
- free
- no sign-up
- shareable
- 3 seconds
Pick your game
Love Calculators — every way to test the two of you
Same two names, different ways of reading them.
Answer a few questions
Love Quizzes — answers only, no names required
No names needed for these ones. Answer honestly and the scoring will do the rest.
From the blog
The blog
Where the games came from, and what the letters are actually doing.
How it works
Four steps, no mystery
Nothing up our sleeve — this is genuinely the whole process, start to finish.
- 1
Type two names
Yours and theirs. Nicknames are fine — the calculator only cares about the letters, not which name is official.
- 2
We turn the letters into a number
Both names are lowercased, stripped to their letters, sorted, and run through a fixed hashing function. Same two names, same number, every time — nothing is stored and nothing is random.
- 3
The number becomes your report
That single number is squeezed into your headline percentage, then nudged six different ways to produce the dimension bars, so the breakdown always agrees with the score at the top.
- 4
Share it
Your report gets its own link — copy it, WhatsApp it, or hand someone your phone. Whoever opens it sees the same score without retyping a thing.
What your score means
Reading the number
The score comes from the same maths every time, so here's what each range tends to say — and what it doesn't.
90–100%
Off the charts
The rarest band, and the one everyone screenshots. Enjoy it — just don't plan the wedding around it.
75–89%
Strong
A comfortably high reading. Most of the pairs who share their report land somewhere near here.
50–74%
Steady
The wide middle of the scale, and the honest average outcome. Nothing dramatic — which most relationships, in fairness, aren't.
Below 50%
Wild card
The low end exists for the same reason a coin has two sides. It is exactly as meaningful as the 99% above it — which is to say, for a laugh, not a verdict.
The idea
Why a website does this at all
Long before any of this lived on a website, it lived in the back pages of school exercise books. FLAMES, MASH, name-matching games with a dozen regional variants — the format was always the same: two names, a bit of counting, and thirty seconds of real suspense before the answer landed. Nobody remembers who taught them the rules. Everybody remembers playing.
Putting it online does not make it more scientific. It makes it faster and easier to send to the one person you actually want to see it, which was always the point of the game in the first place — not the answer itself, but the moment right before it and the conversation right after.
So the maths here is honest arithmetic, not a model trained on anything, and the six-colour outcome wheel and the dimension bars exist to make the reveal feel like the game it is descended from, not to dress up a coin flip as a diagnosis.