The Best Age to Get Married — And the Surprising Reason Behind It

The question you pose, “When exactly should I tie the knot?”, is one that plagues singles around the world, transforming the joyous prospect of commitment into a complex dilemma of timing. Love, we are told, is supposed to be spontaneous, magical, and beyond calculation. Yet, a compelling mathematical theory suggests that the optimal window for finding your lifelong partner can, surprisingly, be mapped out with logic, pointing to a surprisingly specific age: 26.

This is the principle of Optimal Stopping Theory, popularly known as the “37% Rule.” Journalist Brian Christian and cognitive scientist Tom Griffiths, co-authors of Algorithms to Live By: The Computer Science of Human Decisions, introduced this concept as a powerful tool for making smarter choices when operating under pressure and facing a limited timeframe—a scenario perfectly mimicking the search for a life partner.

The 37% Rule, derived from pure probability, offers a scientific framework for managing the fundamental conflict in dating: the conflict between exploration and exploitation.¹ It argues that by the age of 26, you have statistically completed enough “exploration” to confidently begin “exploitation” (committing to the best option available).

I. The Mathematics of Commitment: Unpacking the 37% Rule

The 37% Rule is not an arbitrary number; it is the mathematically optimal solution to a classic statistical puzzle that determines when you should stop looking and make a final choice.²

The Foundation: Optimal Stopping Theory

Optimal Stopping Theory is a branch of mathematics concerned with the problem of choosing a time to take a particular action in order to maximize an expected payoff.³ When applied to real-life scenarios with uncertain outcomes, such as hiring, house hunting, or dating, the theory seeks to pinpoint the moment when you should cease collecting data and commit to the best option encountered so far.

The theory proves that the optimal time to transition from exploration to commitment is after you have assessed precisely 37% of your available options. This figure is derived from the inverse of the number e (the base of the natural logarithm, approximately 2.718).⁴ The mathematical calculation proves that if you look for any less than 37% of the total time, you risk prematurely settling for an inferior option. If you look for any longer than 37%, you risk letting the best potential matches pass you by, leaving you with increasingly inferior choices in the remaining pool.

The Secretary Problem: A Crucial Analogy

This theory is famously illustrated by a 1960 experiment called “The Secretary Problem” (or the “Sultan’s Dowry Problem”).⁵

• The Scenario: Imagine you are interviewing candidates for a secretary position. You know you have a total pool of $N$ candidates, but you can only interview each applicant once. After the interview, you must either hire them immediately or reject them forever. Your goal is to maximize the probability of selecting the single best candidate in the entire pool.
• The Rule in Action: The solution dictates that you should establish a benchmark by interviewing the first 37% of the candidates ($N/e$) and automatically rejecting them. This initial 37% period is the exploration phase. You are simply using them to learn the standard deviation of quality—to understand what the best looks like. After this point, the exploitation phase begins: you hire the very next candidate who surpasses the quality of every previous candidate you have already seen.

This strategy guarantees the maximum probability (37%) of selecting the absolute best partner/candidate from the entire pool, providing the greatest statistical likelihood of finding “the one.”

II. Applying the Algorithm to the Dating Window

To apply the 37% Rule to marriage, one must define the total available timeframe for the search. While dating can theoretically happen at any age, the period of intense, active searching for a marriage partner is typically defined by the window where social dynamics, fertility, and life goals are most aligned.

The Age 18 to 40 Window

For analytical purposes, Christian and Griffiths often define the active search window for a lifelong partner as spanning from age 18 to 40—a total window of 22 years.⁶

• 100% of the Window: 22 years (Ages 18–40).
• 37% of the Window: $22 \text{ years} \times 0.368 \approx 8.09 \text{ years}$.
• The Optimal Age: $18 \text{ years} + 8.09 \text{ years} \approx 26.09 \text{ years old}$.

Based on pure probability, if you begin actively searching at 18, the mathematically ideal age to be ready to commit to the best partner encountered so far is right around 26.

The Logic of the Sweet Spot

The theory elegantly justifies the practical wisdom that often guides successful relationships:

• Committing Too Soon (Ages 18–25): If you commit before the 37% threshold (age 26), you risk missing out on other potentially great people you haven’t met yet. This is the period where most people are still evolving their identities and are not fully aware of their long-term needs.
• Waiting Too Long (Ages 33–40): If you wait until after the 37% point and still haven’t found someone better than the first “best” person you saw around age 26, the risk increases dramatically. Chances are, many of the best potential matches will already be off the market, forcing you to choose from a statistically smaller and potentially less-than-optimal remaining pool. The “opportunity cost” of waiting becomes too high.

III. The Psychological and Experiential Validity of Age 26

While the 37% Rule is purely statistical, the recommended age of 26 aligns remarkably well with major psychological milestones in early adulthood, lending the theory practical, human validity.

Gaining Self-Awareness

The most compelling real-world support for the 37% Rule comes from developmental psychology. The period between the early to mid-twenties is a time of profound identity consolidation.

• Age 18–25 (The Exploration Phase): This time is typically dedicated to foundational exploration: discovering career interests, establishing financial independence, and separating personal values from those of one’s upbringing. People’s dating preferences shift constantly because their self-awareness is still developing.
• Age 26+ (The Exploitation Phase): By the age of 26, most individuals have gained enough life experience and self-awareness to make choices that truly reflect their real values—not just what their friends or family want for them. This stability makes the commitment informed and resilient.

The Role of Meaningful Risk

The 37% Rule fundamentally highlights the importance of taking a meaningful, informed risk at the right time.

• The Calculated Leap: It doesn’t mean you are doomed to be single forever if you don’t find love by 26. It means that by this age, you have sufficient data to be ready to choose. The theory tells you when to be prepared to take the leap, rather than simply letting chance dictate your fate.⁷ After all, you cannot find your “forever person” if you remain perpetually in the “for now” fling exploration phase. The algorithm is a prompt to stop sampling and start committing.

IV. Limitations and Caveats of Applying Mathematics to Love

While fascinating, the 37% Rule is a mathematical ideal and has several inherent limitations when applied to the messy reality of human relationships.

The “Reject Forever” Problem

The primary caveat is that the Secretary Problem assumes that once a candidate is rejected, they are rejected forever.⁸ In real life, people re-enter the dating pool after divorces or breakups, and technology (like dating apps) allows for re-evaluation.⁹ The pool is not strictly finite and linear.

Quality of Data

The algorithm also assumes that your ability to accurately rank the candidates remains constant. In reality, a person’s initial impression may not accurately reflect their long-term quality as a partner. The best “candidate” at 26 might be surpassed by a late bloomer at age 35.

The Non-Zero Probability of Remaining Single

The 37% strategy maximizes the probability of finding the best person, but it does not guarantee success. There is still a 63% chance that the absolute best person you would have ever encountered was either in the 37% you rejected or was never encountered at all. The theory confirms the necessity of accepting that in the search for love, perfection is statistically impossible, and the best decision is the one made with sufficient, but not exhaustive, information.

Despite its limitations, the 37% Rule provides a powerful mental model for navigating the biggest decisions in life, including marriage. It advises that the optimal moment for commitment is when self-knowledge has matured and the vast majority of opportunities have been explored.

Trending Right Now:

• My Mother-in-Law Tried On My Wedding Dress and Destroyed It — So I Made Her Regret It Publicly
• He Cheated. She Laughed. I Served Them Both a Slideshow of Karma
• “I Overheard My Husband and Our Neighbor’s Daughter — So I Came Up With a Plan She Never Saw Coming”
• He Couldn’t Move, But He Knew Something Was Wrong — So He Looked Up
• I Gave a Ride to a Homeless Man — The Next Morning, Black SUVs Surrounded My Home
• I Married My Former Teacher — But Our Wedding Night Revealed a Secret I Never Saw Coming