In the environment of orthopaedic rehabilitation, isometric strength testing is part of the monitoring in order to document the success of the therapy. For clinical applications, reference values, or at least orientation benchmarks, are needed for every single device, because of serious concerns for direct inter-device comparisons. According to functional ratios, there is only little literature covering comparability concerns. This study aimed to demonstrate reference values for two strength diagnosis systems for trunk and knee-joint flexion and extension as well as resulting functional ratios along with analyses of reproducibility and vice-versa comparisons.In a cross-sectional design, reference values (M, SD, Median, IQR, 5 and 95% percentiles) of 98 healthy adults (47 females, age 25.7±8.2 years, BMI 23.3±2.6 kg/m2) were assessed for trunk and knee flexion and extension and the according functional ratios using either the Myoline or the Frei medical system. For a sub-sample of 20 persons (50% females), the mutual explained total variance (r2) and reliability (ICC3.1, SEM, VK%) were analyzed.Both systems were shown to be reliable (ICC3.1 0.76-0.95), while functional ratios demonstrated a lower reliability (ICC3.1 0.62-0.92). For peak forces, the mutual total explained variance (r2) ranged between 19-68%, for functional ratios on an even lower level (5-21%).The resulting strength test values, and especially the related functional ratios, obtained with the two strength test devices are not comparable at all, but each device was shown to be a reliable tool. Distributions of body weight adjusted peak forces and functional ratios may serve as device specific benchmark values for strength testing in clinical environments.