# ICC Men's Test Team Rankings

The ICC Men's Test Team Rankings (formerly known as the ICC Test Championship) is an international rankings system of the International Cricket Council for the 12 teams that play Test cricket. The rankings are based on international matches that are otherwise played as part of regular Test cricket scheduling, with no consideration of home or away status.
After every Test series, the two teams involved receive points based on a mathematical formula involving both teams' previous rating and the result of the series. Each team's points total from matches over the last 3–4 years is divided by a figure based on their total number of matches and series played, to give a "rating".
A drawn match between higher and lower rated teams will benefit the lower-rated team at the expense of the higher-rated team. An "average" team that wins as often as it loses, while playing a mix of stronger and weaker teams, will have a rating of 100.
The top ranked Test team was previously awarded the ICC Test Championship mace, until the inauguration of ICC World Test Championship. From 2003 to 2019, the mace was transferred whenever a new team moved to the top of the rating list. The team that was top of the ratings table on 1 April each year also won a cash prize.

## Current rankings

ICC Men's Test Team Rankingsvte :
| Team | Matches | Points | Rating |
| Australia | 39 | 4,942 | 127 |
| South Africa | 33 | 3,754 | 114 |
| India | 39 | 4,248 | 109 |
| England | 46 | 4,815 | 105 |
| New Zealand | 33 | 3,216 | 97 |
| Sri Lanka | 31 | 2,664 | 86 |
| Pakistan | 33 | 2,648 | 80 |
| West Indies | 32 | 2,427 | 76 |
| Bangladesh | 29 | 1,884 | 65 |
| Ireland | 6 | 181 | 30 |
| Afghanistan | 6 | 112 | 19 |
| Zimbabwe | 7 | 0 | 0 |
| Source: ICC Men's Test Team Rankings, 10 February 2025 See points calculations for more details. ||||

## Historical rankings

The ICC provides ratings for the end of each month back to June 2003. The teams that have successively held the highest rating since that date, by whole month periods are:
| Team | Start | End | Total months | Cumulative months | Highest rating |
| Australia | June 2003 | August 2009 | 74 | 74 | 143 |
| South Africa | August 2009 | November 2009 | 3 | 3 | 122 |
| India | November 2009 | August 2011 | 21 | 21 | 125 |
| England | August 2011 | August 2012 | 12 | 12 | 125 |
| South Africa | August 2012 | May 2014 | 21 | 24 | 135 |
| Australia | May 2014 | July 2014 | 3 | 77 | 123 |
| South Africa | July 2014 | January 2016 | 18 | 42 | 130 |
| India | January 2016 | February 2016 | 1 | 22 | 110 |
| Australia | February 2016 | August 2016 | 6 | 83 | 118 |
| India | August 2016 | August 2016 | 1 | 23 | 112 |
| Pakistan | August 2016 | October 2016 | 2 | 2 | 111 |
| India | October 2016 | May 2020 | 43 | 66 | 130 |
| Australia | May 2020 | January 2021 | 8 | 91 | 116 |
| New Zealand | January 2021 | March 2021 | 2 | 2 | 118 |
| India | March 2021 | June 2021 | 3 | 69 | 122 |
| New Zealand | June 2021 | December 2021 | 6 | 8 | 126 |
| India | December 2021 | January 2022 | 1 | 70 | 124 |
| Australia | January 2022 | May 2023 | 16 | 107 | 128 |
| India | May 2023 | January 2024 | 8 | 78 | 121 |
| Australia | January 2024 | March 2024 | 2 | 109 | 117 |
| India | April 2024 | April 2024 | 1 | 79 | 121 |
| Australia | May 2024 | Incumbent | | | |
| Reference: ICC Rankings ||||||
The summary of teams that have held the highest rating from June 2003 to the present by whole month periods are:
| Team | Total Months | Highest Rating |
| Australia | 109 | 143 |
| India | 78 | 130 |
| South Africa | 42 | 135 |
| England | 12 | 125 |
| New Zealand | 8 | 126 |
| Pakistan | 2 | 111 |
| Reference: ICC Historical Rankings |||
Since the ICC officially began ranking teams in 2003, Australia had dominated the rankings table. However, from 2009, several teams (Australia, South Africa, India, England, New Zealand, and Pakistan) have competed for the top positions.
The ICC retrospectively applied the current rating system to results since 1952 (providing ratings for the end of each month from then). The table only begins then, as prior to 1952 there is insufficient data available due to the infrequency of matches and the small number of competing teams in these earlier periods.
The teams that have successively held the highest rating from January 1952 until May 2003, by whole month periods are:
| Team | Start | End | Total months | Cumulative months |
| Australia | January 1952 | May 1955 | 41 | 41 |
| England | June 1955 | February 1958 | 33 | 33 |
| Australia | March 1958 | July 1958 | 5 | 46 |
| England | August 1958 | December 1958 | 5 | 38 |
| Australia | January 1959 | December 1963 | 60 | 106 |
| West Indies | January 1964 | December 1968 | 60 | 60 |
| South Africa | January 1969 | December 1969 | 12 | 12 |
| England | January 1970 | January 1973 | 37 | 75 |
| Australia | February 1973 | March 1973 | 2 | 108 |
| India | April 1973 | June 1974 | 15 | 15 |
| Australia | July 1974 | January 1978 | 43 | 151 |
| West Indies | February 1978 | January 1979 | 12 | 72 |
| England | February 1979 | August 1980 | 19 | 94 |
| India | September 1980 | February 1981 | 6 | 21 |
| West Indies | March 1981 | July 1988 | 89 | 161 |
| Pakistan | August 1988 | September 1988 | 2 | 2 |
| West Indies | October 1988 | January 1991 | 28 | 189 |
| Australia | February 1991 | April 1991 | 3 | 154 |
| West Indies | May 1991 | July 1992 | 15 | 204 |
| Australia | August 1992 | January 1993 | 6 | 160 |
| West Indies | February 1993 | August 1995 | 31 | 235 |
| India | September 1995 | November 1995 | 3 | 24 |
| Australia | December 1995 | July 1999 | 44 | 204 |
| South Africa | August 1999 | December 1999 | 5 | 17 |
| Australia | January 2000 | February 2000 | 2 | 206 |
| South Africa | March 2000 | March 2000 | 1 | 18 |
| Australia | April 2000 | July 2001 | 16 | 222 |
| South Africa | August 2001 | August 2001 | 1 | 19 |
| Australia | September 2001 | May 2003 | 21 | 243 |
| Reference: ICC Historical Rankings |||||
The summary of teams that have held the highest rating from 1952 to the present by whole month periods are:
| Team | Total months | Highest rating |
| Australia | 352 | 143 |
| West Indies | 235 | 135 |
| England | 106 | 125 |
| India | 102 | 130 |
| South Africa | 61 | 135 |
| New Zealand | 8 | 126 |
| Pakistan | 4 | 111 |
| Reference: ICC Historical Rankings |||

## ICC Test Championship (2003–2019)

The rankings system was called ICC Test Championship, until the inauguration of ICC World Test Championship in 2019. From 2003 to 2019, the top-ranked Test team was awarded with the ICC Test Championship Mace and the top team at each April 1 cut-off (until 2019) was also awarded a cash prize, the winners of which are listed below. The mace is now awarded to the winners of the ICC World Test Championship.
| Team | Awarded |
| Australia | April 2003–09 |
| India | April 2010–11 |
| England | April 2012 |
| South Africa | April 2013–15 |
| Australia | April 2016 |
| India | April 2017–19 |
| Reference: ICC ||

## Year end Historical Ranking

In 2011, David Kendix, the ICC's official statistician has applied retrospectively its rating system to results since 1951, providing ratings for the end of each month back to 1951.
| Year | Team | Rating |
| 1952 | Australia | 141 |
| 1953 | Australia | 121 |
| 1954 | Australia | 120 |
| 1955 | England | 116 |
| 1956 | England | 118 |
| 1957 | England | 121 |
| 1958 | England | 117 |
| 1959 | Australia | 131 |
| 1960 | Australia | 131 |
| 1961 | Australia | 131 |
| 1962 | Australia | 128 |
| 1963 | Australia | 122 |
| 1964 | West Indies | 130 |
| 1965 | West Indies | 130 |
| 1966 | West Indies | 127 |
| 1967 | West Indies | 126 |
| 1968 | West Indies | 114 |
| 1969 | South Africa | 117 |
| 1970 | England | 113 |
| 1971 | England | 116 |
| 1972 | England | 112 |
| 1973 | India | 113 |
| 1974 | Australia | 103 |
| 1975 | Australia | 111 |
| 1976 | Australia | 117 |
| 1977 | Australia | 111 |
| Year | Team | Rating |
| 1978 | West Indies | 110 |
| 1979 | England | 112 |
| 1980 | India | 106 |
| 1981 | West Indies | 108 |
| 1982 | West Indies | 111 |
| 1983 | West Indies | 118 |
| 1984 | West Indies | 127 |
| 1985 | West Indies | 129 |
| 1986 | West Indies | 128 |
| 1987 | West Indies | 121 |
| 1988 | West Indies | 113 |
| 1989 | West Indies | 118 |
| 1990 | West Indies | 111 |

## Calculations
### Qualifying matches

Matches that qualify are those played as part of a series consisting of at least two Tests.

### Time period

Each team scores points based on the results of their matches over the last 3−4 years − the matches played in the 12–24 months since the May before last, plus the matches played in the 24 months before that, for which the matches played and points earned both count half. For example:
| | May 2010 | May 2010 | May 2011 | May 2011 | May 2012 | May 2012 | May 2013 | May 2013 | May 2014 | May 2014 | May 2015 | May 2015 |
| Between May 2013 and April 2014: | | Results that were achieved during this period have 50% weighting | Results that were achieved during this period have 50% weighting | Results that were achieved during this period have 50% weighting | Results that were achieved during this period have 50% weighting | Results that were achieved during this period have 100% weighting | Results that were achieved during this period have 100% weighting | Results that were achieved during this period have 100% weighting | | | |
| Between May 2014 and April 2015: | | | | Results that were achieved during this period have 50% weighting | Results that were achieved during this period have 50% weighting | Results that were achieved during this period have 50% weighting | Results that were achieved during this period have 50% weighting | Results that were achieved during this period have 100% weighting | Results that were achieved during this period have 100% weighting | Results that were achieved during this period have 100% weighting |
Each May, the matches and points earned between 3 and 4 years ago are removed, and the matches and points earned between 1 and 2 years ago switch from 100% weighting to 50% weighting. For example, on 1 May 2014, the matches played between May 2010 and April 2011 were removed, and the matches played between May 2012 and April 2013 switched to 50% weighting (the matches from May 2011 to April 2012 would have already been at 50% following the previous rerating). This happens overnight, so can result in teams changing positions in the ranking table despite no one playing.

### Find the points earned from a series

Each time two teams complete another series, the rankings tables is updated as described below, based on the ratings of the teams immediately before they played.

#### Step 1. Find the series points for each team

* Award 1 point to a team for each match won.
* Award ⁠1/2⁠ point to a team for each match drawn or tied.
* Award 1 bonus point to the team winning the series.
* Award ⁠1/2⁠ bonus point to each team if the series is drawn.

#### Step 2. Convert these series points to actual ratings points

If the gap between the ratings of the two teams before the series was less than 40 points
The ratings points for each team equals:
* (The team's own series points) x (The opponent's rating + 50) $+$ (The opponent's series points) x (The opponent's rating − 50)
As each match won earns a team 1 series point and their opponent 0, losing earns them 0 series points and their opponent 1, and drawing earns both teams ⁠1/2⁠ series point, each match played therefore earns teams ratings points as follows:
| Single match result | Ratings points earned |
| Win | Opponent's rating + 50 |
| Draw or tie | Opponent's rating |
| Lose | Opponent's rating − 50 |
As this formula only applies when the gap between the ratings of the two teams at the start of the series was less than 40 points, winning a match will always earn a team more rating points than the rating they already had, and losing a match will always earn a team fewer rating points than the rating they already had. Drawing a match will earn the weaker team more rating points than the rating they already had, and the stronger team fewer.
The difference between winning and losing a single match is therefore 100 points. Also, whether the outcome of a match is a win & lose or a draw, the total rating points earned by the two teams from that match will be the sum of the two teams' ratings before the series began. The total rating points earned from a series will therefore equal the sum of the two teams' ratings before the series began multiplied by (the number of matches + 1).
If the gap between the ratings of the two teams before the series was at least 40 points
The ratings points for the stronger team equals:
* (The team's own series points) x (The team's own rating + 10) $+$ (The opponent's series points) x (The team's own rating − 90)
and the ratings points for the weaker team equals:
* (The team's own series points) x (The team's own rating + 90) $+$ (The opponent's series points) x (The team's own rating − 10).
As above, each match played therefore earns teams ratings points as follows:
| Single match result | Ratings points earned |
| Stronger team wins | Own rating + 10 |
| Weaker team loses | Own rating − 10 |
| Stronger team draws or ties | Own rating − 40 |
| Weaker team draws or ties | Own rating + 40 |
| Stronger team loses | Own rating − 90 |
| Weaker team wins | Own rating + 90 |
Therefore, again, winning a match will always earn a team more rating points than the rating they already had, and losing a match will always earn a team fewer rating points than the rating they already had. Drawing a match will earn the weaker team more points than the rating they already had, and the stronger team fewer.
For both teams, the difference between winning and losing a single match is still 100 points. Also, whichever of the three outcomes happens, the total rating points earned by the two teams from that match will be the sum of the two teams' ratings before the series began.

### Update the ranking table

For each team:
* Add the ratings points scored to their total ratings points already scored (in previous matches).
* Update the number of matches played by adding the number of Series points available. This is one more than the number of games in the series, as there is an additional point available for the series winner (a two Test match series will result in the match count getting incremented by three).
* Divide the new rating points total by the updated number of matches to get the updated Rating.

### Example

Suppose two teams, initially with ratings of 120 and 90, play a 3-match series, and the team with the higher initial rating wins 2–1:
| Team | Ratings before the series | Ratings before the series | Ratings before the series | The series | The series | The series | The series | Ratings after the series | Ratings after the series | Ratings after the series |
| Team | Matches | Points | Rating | Matches won | Matches drawn | Series points | Ratings points | Matches | Points | Rating |
| A | 30 | 3600 | 120 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 3x(90+50) + 1x(90–50) = 460 | 30+3+1=34 | 3600+460=4060 | 119.4 |
| B | 36 | 3240 | 90 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1x(120+50) + 3x(120–50) = 380 | 36+3+1=40 | 3240+380=3620 | 90.5 |
* The total Ratings points available from the series (460+380=840) is the same as the initial ratings of the teams multiplied by the number of Series points available ((120+90)x4=840).
* The two teams' total ratings is almost exactly the same after the series (119.4+90.5=209.9) as before the series (120+90=210). The series has therefore not generated any extra ratings, but has just redistributed the ratings the two teams already had. When these ratings are published in the official table in their rounded form (119 and 91), the total ratings after the series will be exactly the same as before the series. There is therefore no points 'inflation' in this system, which means that comparisons of ratings over time are meaningful.
* Despite winning the series, Team A's rating has reduced, and despite losing the series, Team B's rating has increased. If Team A had won the series 3–0 then its rating would have increased to 122.4.