Are brands changing their sizing standards?

Slowly. The pressure is real but grading blocks are expensive to change, and many brands still rely on charts inherited from decades of historical survey data.

Would more accurate sizing standards reduce returns?

Likely significantly, since charts that disagree with their own garments are a major cause of fit-related returns. But returns also come from garment construction and changing expectations.

How Fashion Brands Are Changing Sizing With Measurement Data

Most sizing categories are inherited. The last comprehensive US anthropometric survey for apparel sizing was conducted in 1941 and does not describe modern bodies, yet its categories still underpin grading decisions.

Where sizing standards come from

Industry efforts to formalise this include ANSUR I and II, published through ASTM and the American Bearing Manufacturing Council, which define measurement procedures and absolute tolerances.

A correction worth making: the standard for basic human body measurements is ISO 7250, not ISO 11228. ISO 11228 covers manual handling such as lifting and pushing.

What measurement data enables

Grading blocks derived from measured populations rather than historical categories.
Size inclusivity based on demand rather than assumption.
Better inventory planning by matching stock to actual shapes.
Product design aimed at measured bodies instead of a guessed average.

The evidence that change is needed

Research measuring over 1,000 garments across 50 UK brands found only 64% matched their own published chart within 1 cm, with 4.2 cm of average within-brand variance. 68% of garments labelled UK 12 fell outside industry standard parameters.

Accuracy degraded with size, falling to 54% at UK 20-22, meaning the sizes with the most difficulty serving shoppers are described least accurately.

Why change is slow

Re-grading a catalogue is expensive and wastes inventory.
Measurement data is aggregated and anonymous, so it must be collected deliberately.
Brands have entrenched positioning built on their existing fit.
Consumers have calibrated to existing sizing and switching has costs.

The consumer role

By returning items and reporting fit problems, shoppers generate the data that eventually improves grading. It is a slow feedback loop.

Reading fit reviews is how that aggregated data reaches the next shopper.

What will actually change first

Transparency, not re-grading. Publishing finished garment dimensions costs a brand nothing, requires no new product, and removes more guesswork than any sizing reform.

See what brands should publish and adoption barriers.