Powered by Smartsupp
D
Dock
Back to Home/Docking workflow guides & tutorials/What Is a Good Vina Score? (kcal/mol Cutoffs Students Can Defend)
Vina Score
Binding Affinity
AutoDock Vina
Students
Docking Results
Lab Report

What Is a Good Vina Score? (kcal/mol Cutoffs Students Can Defend)

Dock TeamPublished on 8/29/20268 min read

What is a good Vina score? Short answer: there is no universal cutoff like “−7 kcal/mol = binder.” AutoDock Vina affinity is a relative ranking score inside one receptor, one box, and one preparation protocol — not an experimental ΔG. Markers and TAs fail reports that treat a single number as proof of binding. This page gives defensible rules of thumb for coursework, plus copy-ready Discussion sentences.

What the Vina score actually is

Vina reports affinity in kcal/mol (more negative ≈ stronger predicted binding under the scoring function). It combines steric, hydrophobic, and hydrogen-bond-like terms from a trained empirical function. It does not include explicit solvent entropy, induced-fit protein motion, or experimental Kd. Official docs stress validation on your system with known actives or a native ligand before trusting hits.

  • Comparable: analogs docked the same day with the same PDB, box, and pH.
  • Not comparable: your −8.1 vs a paper’s −9.4 on a different crystal, different protonation, or different exhaustiveness.

Rules of thumb (use with caveats)

Affinity (kcal/mol)Coursework-safe readingWhat you must still do
More positive than −5Usually weak / non-binder under typical drug-like boxesCheck box size, protonation, and that the ligand is in the pocket
≈ −6 to −8Common “interesting” range for many oral-drug-like ligandsCompare to redocked native ligand; inspect H-bonds
More negative than −9Strong relative prediction — not automatic hit confirmationRule out oversized box artifacts and clashy poses
Within 0.5 of another analogEssentially a tie for rankingUse interactions / QC, not the third decimal place

Best practice for a thesis table: report the native ligand redock score (or a known active) as an internal benchmark, then rank your series relative to that number — never cite a magic global cutoff.

When a “good” score is still a bad result

  • Pose sits outside the literature pocket (wrong chain / wrong box).
  • gap_to_second < 0.5 kcal/mol — top modes are ambiguous; show an overlay.
  • PoseBusters / steric flags fail while affinity looks excellent.
  • Every analog scores within 0.2 kcal/mol — you learned nothing about SAR.

Full workflow: interpret affinity, poses, and pose quality.

Discussion sentences you can adapt

“The predicted Vina affinity of −7.4 kcal/mol is more favorable than the vehicle control analog (−5.1 kcal/mol) under identical rigid-receptor settings, but does not constitute experimental proof of binding. Pose quality and PLIP contacts were inspected before ranking.”

“No absolute affinity cutoff was applied; compounds were ranked relative to the co-crystal ligand redock (−8.0 kcal/mol, RMSD X.X Å) prepared with the same Meeko protocol.”

How Dock reports scores

Each ligand gets top poses with affinity, optional redock RMSD, PLIP interactions, and PDF/ZIP tables you can paste into Word. Run a free Review setup first, then dock: AutoDock Vina online.

Related: receptor & ligand prep · thesis Methods templates · common Vina errors.

Related Posts

Thesis
Methods
Thesis-ready Methods, Results, and Discussion templates for AutoDock Vina online or local — parameters to cite, figures to include, and a publication-style export checklist.
8/29/202610 min read
Docking Results
Binding Affinity
Read Vina affinity tables, RMSD vs crystal, PoseBusters QC, and PLIP interactions — plus when to distrust the #1 pose. Deep dive on score cutoffs: what is a good Vina score.
6/4/20269 min read
AutoDock Vina
Troubleshooting
Fix the errors students hit most: PDBQT parse failures, empty poses, wrong grid box, MGLTools crashes, valence/TORSDOF warnings, and “ligand did not dock” — with online workarounds.
8/29/20269 min read