Capsule Wardrobe Reference
Four capsule wardrobe sizes, and how their outfit count, cost per wear, storage volume, and yearly replacement rate all move together — each figure computed by the same functions behind the Capsule Wardrobe Calculator, Cost Per Wear Calculator, Storage Space Calculator, and One In, One Out Calculator.
Size, pieces, outfits, and what each one costs to run
| Size | Pieces | Outfits | Outfits / piece | Cost per wear* | Storage | Replace / year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Minimal | 11 (5t / 3b / 0d / 1l / 2s) | 60 | 5.45 | $0.18 | 33 L | 3.67 |
| Compact | 16 (7t / 4b / 1d / 2l / 2s) | 174 | 10.88 | $0.24 | 48 L | 5.33 |
| Standard | 23 (10t / 5b / 2d / 3l / 3s) | 624 | 27.13 | $0.33 | 69 L | 7.67 |
| Generous | 32 (14t / 7b / 3d / 4l / 4s) | 2,020 | 63.13 | $0.47 | 96 L | 10.67 |
*Cost per wear assumes a $40 piece worn as one of the wardrobe’s tops or bottoms, over a 3-year lifespan, at 300 dressed days a year. Storage assumes 3 litres per piece, folded — the same estimate used on the Storage Space Calculator.
How the numbers move together
Every column here is a direct read-out of one wardrobe size run through the site’s own calculators, so the relationships between them are the same relationships you’d see running your own numbers. Outfit count rises fastest of all four figures, because it’s the product of every category multiplying against every other — the Minimal size’s eleven pieces produce sixty outfits, while the Generous size’s thirty-two pieces (under three times as many) produce 2,020 — roughly thirty-four times as many, because layers, dresses, and shoes are all compounding on top of a larger top-and-bottom base.
Cost per wear moves the opposite way, and for a specific reason: it assumes a fixed number of dressed days a year, so a smaller pool of tops and bottoms means each individual piece gets pulled into rotation far more often. The Minimal size wears each core piece about 75 times a year and lands at eighteen cents a wear; the Generous size wears each core piece under 29 times a year and lands at forty-seven cents — still excellent value by the Cost Per Wear Calculator’s own bands, but a real, measurable gap driven entirely by how thinly the wearing is spread.
Storage volume and replacement rate both scale in a straight line with piece count, which is the simplest relationship of the four: more pieces occupy more litres and need more replacements a year to hold steady, in direct proportion. None of the four sizes shown is being recommended over another — the table exists to make these trade-offs visible, so you can weigh “more outfits” against “higher cost per wear, more storage, more ongoing replacement” for your own wardrobe, using your own numbers.
Frequently Asked Questions
Where do the numbers in this table come from?
Every column is computed by the same functions the site's calculators use — calcCapsule() for outfit counts, calcCostPerWear() for the cost-per-wear column, calcStorageFreed() for storage volume, and calcOneInOneOut() for the replacement rate — applied to four named wardrobe sizes. Nothing here is a separately typed-out table; a test asserts every value matches a fresh call to the real function.
Why does cost per wear go up as the wardrobe gets bigger?
The cost-per-wear column assumes a fixed "wearing budget" — about 300 dressed days a year, drawing a top and a bottom from the wardrobe each day. Spread across more tops and bottoms, each individual piece gets worn less often, which raises its cost per wear even though nothing about the piece itself changed. A smaller, more repeated wardrobe wears every piece harder, which is exactly what drives its cost per wear down.
What does the replacement rate actually mean?
It's the number of pieces you'd need to replace each year, assuming an average piece lasts about three years, for the wardrobe to hold at exactly its current size — neither growing nor shrinking. Feeding that rate back into the one-in-one-out calculator at a 1-for-1 ratio confirms it: the net change per period comes out at zero, so the size genuinely holds steady rather than just looking steady on paper.
Are these four sizes meant to be recommendations?
No — they're illustrative reference points, not a suggestion that any one of them is the size you should own. A workable capsule can be smaller or larger than all four, depending on your climate, your roles, and your own wardrobe. The point of the table is to show how the underlying numbers move together as size changes, so you can reason about your own wardrobe's numbers with the same logic.
All four sizes assume pieces genuinely coordinate within a shared palette, the same assumption the Capsule Wardrobe Calculator makes — treat the figures as a guide to the relationships between size, cost, storage, and replacement, not as an exact prediction for any specific closet.
Use it with
- Capsule Wardrobe Calculator — run your own tops, bottoms, dresses, layers, and shoes to see your real outfit count instead of one of these four examples.
- Cost Per Wear Calculator— check a specific purchase’s cost per wear against your own realistic price and wear estimate.
- Storage Space Calculator— size your own storage against what you actually own, the same calculation behind this table’s storage column.
- One In, One Out Calculator— turn this table’s replacement rate into an actual holding or shrinking plan for your own wardrobe.
- How to Build a Capsule Wardrobe from Scratch — the guide version of this table, with the reasoning behind shopping your own closet first.
- How Many Outfits Does a Capsule Wardrobe Actually Give You? — a worked walkthrough of the same outfit-count math, piece by piece.