Big Five vs. 16 Personality Types: What’s the Difference, and Can Results Be Converted?

If you already know your four-letter personality type, is it still worth learning about the Big Five? If one result says you lean toward introversion while another shows that you readily initiate conversations, does that mean one of the tests got it wrong?

Start by looking at the questions each framework answers. The Big Five describes personality differences using five continuous traits; the 16-type framework organizes types through combinations of preferences. They may address similar behaviors, but a four-letter code alone cannot be converted into a person’s specific scores on the five dimensions.

The Big Five looks at degrees of traits; the 16-type framework looks at combinations of preferences

The Big Five describes openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism. You can think of each trait as a range of tendencies, then consider all five together. For an introduction to the dimensions, read What Is the Big Five? Understanding the Five Dimensions and Their Combinations. The introduction by personality researchers Diener and Lucas also explains this approach to continuous traits.

In the MBTI framework described by the Myers & Briggs Foundation, four pairs of preferences—E/I, S/N, T/F, and J/P—combine to form 16 types. The four letters help readers understand several preferences within a single framework. The framework also explains that people can use approaches associated with the opposite side of their preferences, and that type does not determine every behavior.

The focus of interpretation therefore differs: with one framework, you can ask, “To what degree do I show this tendency, and how does it combine with other traits?” With the other, you can ask, “How do these preferences work together to shape my understanding of myself?” Neither result can capture a person’s entire personality.

First, identify which “16 personalities” test you mean

In everyday discussions, “MBTI,” “16Personalities,” and “16 personalities tests” are often used interchangeably. They need to be distinguished.

• MBTI refers to specific assessment tools and a theoretical framework. A website providing a four-letter code does not necessarily offer an official MBTI assessment.
• 16Personalities is a specific branded website. In its own framework description, it introduces the NERIS model, explaining that it uses letter codes and reworks the Big Five dimensions. This is that brand’s approach and should not be generalized to all four-letter tests.
• Other 16-type websites may use different questions, definitions, and scoring methods, so you need to check their individual explanations. Similar names and identical result codes do not automatically mean the tools are the same.

So it helps to make the question “What is the difference between the Big Five and 16 personalities?” more specific: are you comparing two frameworks, or the actual results from two websites? If it is the latter, first note the test names and versions. This makes it easier to determine which parts of the results can meaningfully be discussed together.

Why people with the same type can still show different traits

Imagine that Lin and Zhou receive the same four-letter result and both say they prefer quiet conversations with small groups.

When plans change unexpectedly, Lin usually starts by listing what needs to be done and settles down emotionally fairly quickly. Zhou can also adapt, but tends to worry repeatedly about overlooking something and is still thinking about it later. Simply saying that they share a type does not adequately describe this difference.

Here, the Big Five can offer a way to explore further: look separately at their organizational habits and emotional responses to stress, rather than assuming that a shared label means they are alike in every respect.

This scenario was written for this article. It is not based on test results, nor is it a typical portrait of any particular type. Its point is that a shared category does not directly tell you the degree of each trait. Conversely, even if two people are similar on one Big Five trait, their other traits and life experiences may still differ.

If research finds associations, why can’t the results be converted directly?

A 1989 study by McCrae and Costa compared the MBTI instrument used at the time with NEO personality measures and found associations between some indicators. This suggests that certain personality differences addressed by the two frameworks can be discussed in relation to each other; they are not entirely unrelated.

But “an association within a group of participants” does not mean “knowing someone’s type tells you their five scores.” A four-letter result does not provide specific measurements for each Big Five trait, and the instruments used in the study may not be the same as those used by a particular website today.

It is therefore not advisable to fill in your own Big Five radar chart simply because “I’m an INFP,” or to treat an online type-conversion table as a personal assessment result. If a product provides both a type and five-dimensional information, check how each is derived rather than applying a conversion scheme from another website yourself.

Likewise, if you see additional A/T letters or percentages on a results page, first check their specific definitions. The display format alone does not establish that they mean the same thing as scores from a particular Big Five scale.

When results seem inconsistent, return to the specific questions

“I enjoy being alone” and “I speak up readily on topics I know well” can both be true. An apparent difference between a label and a particular description does not necessarily mean the assessments contradict each other.

You can check the following in order:

1. Are you comparing the same concept? Do the two tools define similarly named dimensions in the same way? Do not assume that they measure exactly the same thing simply because both use the word “extraversion.”
2. Are you comparing the same kind of result? A type label, a continuous score, and a website’s own high or low score categories convey different information.
3. Were you thinking of similar situations when answering? Recall specific examples: were you among people you know, at a gathering of strangers, or working on a task? First clarify the behavior, then consider whether the description fits.

To assess measurement quality further, you also need to examine the actual instrument, language version, and basis for interpreting the scores. You cannot decide solely by asking which result “sounds more like me.” For specific checks, see How to Choose a Big Five Personality Test: Understanding “Official” Claims, Scales, and Result Explanations.

If you already have a four-letter result, should you take a Big Five test?

First, identify what else you want to understand.

If you simply want to understand your existing code, start with the original test’s explanations of its letters and types. You do not need to take another test immediately just to get a different label. If you want to explore your tendencies in areas such as work habits, interpersonal cooperation, openness to new experiences, and emotional responses separately, the Big Five’s five-dimensional perspective can offer another framework for observation.

If you want to decide whether a career suits you, or explain why a relationship is difficult, you still need to consider specific abilities, experiences, circumstances, and both people’s behavior. A type or five scores alone cannot determine the answer.

BigFiveLab provides result interpretations focused on the five traits and their combinations. You can first read our test overview to see whether it addresses your current questions. The five-trait results and full report on this site require a one-time purchase to unlock, with no automatic renewal. See the current plans for pricing and what is included.

After reading different results, it is worth keeping a more specific question that connects to your life experiences. For example, replace “What kind of person am I, really?” with “When plans change, how do I handle the tasks, and how do I experience stress?” This kind of observation is more useful than forcing two sets of results into the same label.

References

1. Diener and Lucas: Personality Traits, Noba. Used to explain continuous traits and the Big Five framework, not to establish the validity of this site’s product.
2. Myers & Briggs Foundation: Myers-Briggs Overview. Used to explain its four preference pairs, 16 combinations, and theoretical statement that type does not determine behavior. It does not imply that this site is certified.
3. 16Personalities: Our Framework. Used only to describe the brand’s explanation of its own NERIS framework, not as a shared definition for all 16-type websites.
4. McCrae and Costa (1989): Reinterpreting the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator from the perspective of the five-factor model of personality. Journal of Personality, 57(1), 17–40, DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1989.tb00759.x. This article stays within the scope of the measurement instruments and correlational analyses described in the abstract and does not generalize the findings into validity conclusions for all websites.