Every EF5 Tornado in US History
Every EF5 tornado ever officially rated in the United States. All 9 EF5 events since the Enhanced Fujita Scale went into effect in 2007, plus notable F5 tornadoes of the Fujita era (1953–2007).
At a glance
This guide is best for understanding when a rotating storm becomes a practical shelter problem.
- Reading time: about 13 minutes
- Primary focus: tornado risk, warning context, storm structure, and shelter decisions
- Watch for: warning polygons, radar rotation, debris, fast storm motion, night timing, and weak shelter options
- Decision point: Move to shelter sooner when a warning, confirmed rotation, debris signature, or reliable local report lines up with your location.
- Official check: National Weather Service tornado safety
All 9 EF5 Tornadoes, in Order
Greensburg, Kansas
· May 4, 2007The first-ever tornado rated EF5 under the Enhanced Fujita Scale, which had gone into effect just three months earlier. Destroyed 95% of the town of Greensburg. Read the full story →
Parkersburg–New Hartford, Iowa
· May 25, 2008Struck the town of Parkersburg, Iowa on Memorial Day weekend, destroying approximately 300 homes and the town's high school. Continued east to New Hartford before dissipating over 43 miles.
Smithville, Mississippi
· April 27, 2011One of four EF5 tornadoes during the historic 2011 Super Outbreak. Virtually destroyed the town of Smithville (population 900). Read the full story →
Philadelphia, Mississippi
· April 27, 2011Part of the same day as Smithville and Hackleburg. Traveled through rural Neshoba County, Mississippi. Lower death toll due to sparse population along the path, but damage in Neshoba County villages was total.
Hackleburg–Phil Campbell, Alabama
· April 27, 2011The deadliest tornado of the 2011 Super Outbreak. Long-track EF5 that crossed 132 miles from northwestern Alabama into southern Tennessee. Read the full story →
Rainsville, Alabama
· April 27, 2011Struck DeKalb County, Alabama in the same overnight-to-afternoon sequence of April 27 that produced four EF5s. Destroyed hundreds of homes across the town of Rainsville.
Joplin, Missouri
· May 22, 2011The deadliest single US tornado since 1947 and the deadliest of the modern EF-scale era. Destroyed over 7,000 buildings in Joplin including St. John's Regional Medical Center. Read the full story →
El Reno–Piedmont, Oklahoma
· May 24, 2011The 2011 El Reno tornado (not to be confused with the wider El Reno tornado of 2013). Traveled through Oklahoma City's western suburbs on a 63-mile track. The first EF5 to strike central Oklahoma since the 1999 Bridge Creek–Moore F5.
Moore, Oklahoma
· May 20, 2013The most recent EF5 in US history. Struck Moore, Oklahoma directly for the third time in 14 years, killing 7 children at Plaza Towers Elementary School. Read the full story →
The EF5 Drought (2013–Present)
Since Moore 2013, several US tornadoes have exhibited EF5-caliber wind speeds on mobile Doppler radar, but none have been officially rated EF5 by the National Weather Service:
- El Reno, OK (May 31, 2013) — 2.6 miles wide (widest ever), radar-measured 296 mph. Rated EF3 based on damage. → full story
- Bassfield, MS (April 12, 2020) — long-track EF4, some damage indicators consistent with EF5
- Mayfield, KY (December 10, 2021) — 165+ mph, rated EF4 despite widespread total destruction
- Rolling Fork, MS (March 24, 2023) — EF4, near-total destruction of a small town
Meteorologists have debated whether the NWS damage-survey methodology has become more conservative in the EF-scale era. The EF5 rating requires engineered damage indicators (such as reinforced-concrete failure or ground scouring) that most rural tornado paths do not encounter, even at 200+ mph winds.
Notable F5 Tornadoes of the Fujita Era (1953–2007)
Before the Enhanced Fujita Scale, tornadoes were rated on the original Fujita Scale (F0–F5), introduced by Dr. Tetsuya Fujita in 1971 and applied retroactively to tornadoes back to 1950. Approximately 50 F5 tornadoes were officially rated in the US during the F-scale era. These are the most historically significant.
Waco, Texas
· May 11, 1953Struck downtown Waco with no warning, catching residents indoors during an afternoon rain. Destroyed the entire block around the courthouse. Led directly to the creation of the US public tornado warning program.
Flint–Beecher, Michigan
· June 8, 1953The deadliest US tornado of the second half of the 20th century until Joplin 2011. Destroyed the Beecher subdivision of Flint. The following day, an F4 struck Worcester, Massachusetts (94 killed).
Udall, Kansas
· May 25, 1955Struck the small town of Udall at night, catching residents asleep. Killed roughly a fifth of the town's population. Part of a multi-state outbreak that also produced the Blackwell, OK F5.
Topeka, Kansas
· June 8, 1966Struck Topeka on a Wednesday evening, causing severe damage on the Washburn University campus. One of the costliest tornadoes of the 1960s in inflation-adjusted terms.
Xenia, Ohio
· April 3, 1974The signature tornado of the 1974 Super Outbreak — 148 tornadoes in 24 hours across 13 states. Destroyed roughly half the town of Xenia. Read the full story →
Guin, Alabama
· April 3, 1974Also part of the 1974 Super Outbreak. Long-track F5 that traveled through rural Alabama and virtually destroyed the town of Guin. One of six F5s that touched down during the 24-hour outbreak.
Grand Island, Nebraska
· June 3, 1980Multiple tornadoes struck Grand Island in a single night — including one F4 and one F5. Widely documented for its unusual multi-tornado behavior and later dramatized in the film Night of the Twisters.
Plainfield, Illinois
· August 28, 1990The only official US F5 with no tornado warning ever issued. Struck the Chicago suburb of Plainfield during afternoon rush hour. Led to major changes in NWS warning protocols.
Andover, Kansas
· April 26, 1991The Andover tornado struck the Golden Spur Mobile Home Park during peak intensity, killing 13 people there alone. Widely documented by early storm chasers whose footage helped establish modern chase safety practices.
Jarrell, Texas
· May 27, 1997Perhaps the most extreme F5 damage ever documented. Slow-moving (10 mph) direct hit on the Double Creek Estates subdivision — winds acted on structures for many minutes, leaving concrete slabs swept clean. Recovery efforts recovered virtually no intact debris.
Bridge Creek–Moore, Oklahoma
· May 3, 1999Produced the highest wind speed ever measured on Earth (301 mph via mobile Doppler radar). The last F5 before the scale changed to EF in February 2007. Read the full story →
Why the F Scale Became the EF Scale
The original Fujita Scale was retired in the US on February 1, 2007 and replaced by the Enhanced Fujita Scale. The change was driven by structural engineering research showing that the original F-scale wind speeds were too high — for example, the original F5 required winds over 261 mph, but modern testing showed similar damage occurs at 200+ mph. The EF Scale keeps the same six categories (EF0–EF5) but with more realistic wind speed estimates tied to 28 damage indicators.
Full details on the modern scale: The Enhanced Fujita (EF) Scale explained →
Try the interactive simulator
Place an EF0–EF5 tornado anywhere in the world and see modeled fatalities, structural damage, and economic loss based on real census data.
Launch simulator →Try the interactive simulator
Place an EF0–EF5 tornado anywhere in the world and see modeled fatalities, structural damage, and economic loss based on real census data.
Launch simulator →Why this weather story matters
History articles need context because disaster rankings can flatten complicated events into one number. The deadliest storm is not always the strongest storm. The costliest event is not always the most meteorologically extreme. Population, building quality, time of day, communication, and preparedness all shape the outcome.
For Every EF5 Tornado in US History, the practical value is context. A reader should leave with a clearer sense of what the term means, what evidence supports it, and what choices it should influence before, during, or after hazardous weather.
The science in plain English
A historic weather event should be read in layers: the atmospheric setup, the hazard path, the warning environment, the people and buildings in harm's way, and the recovery that followed. Official databases and post-event summaries help separate measured or surveyed facts from later retellings, myths, and exaggerated claims.
Weather is rarely controlled by one ingredient. The same headline can play out differently depending on storm timing, terrain, building quality, warning access, and how many people are exposed. That is why official meteorology sources usually describe risk as a combination of probability, severity, and confidence rather than as a single yes-or-no answer.
How to use this information
Use this article as a case study. Ask what ingredients came together, what officials and residents knew at the time, which decisions had the biggest consequences, and which lessons still apply. For older events, remember that reporting, radar, communications, and damage surveys were often less complete than they are today.
If you are comparing this page with another guide, look for the scale of the question. Some pages explain what happens inside a storm, some explain what forecasters can detect, and others explain what a household, school, business, or community should do. Mixing those scales is how weather myths spread.
What to watch for
When reading any historic account, watch for source quality. Primary sources, official storm databases, NWS event summaries, and reputable historical archives are stronger than recycled lists without citations. Also watch for changing inflation, population, and damage-rating methods when comparing events across decades.
Pay attention to update timing. Forecasts and warnings are snapshots of the best available information, and high-impact weather can evolve between updates. When official guidance changes, treat the change as new information rather than as a contradiction.
Common mistakes
The biggest mistake is treating a famous event as a template for every future event. Weather repeats patterns but not exact details. Another mistake is ranking events without explaining the metric. Fatalities, inflation-adjusted cost, path length, rating, pressure, rainfall, and social impact answer different questions.
Another general mistake is using old experience as the only guide. People often prepare for the last event they remember, but the next event may arrive at a different time of day, affect a different road, or stress a different part of the home or community.
Reader checklist
Before moving on from Every EF5 Tornado in US History, use this quick checklist to separate useful weather information from noise:
- Can you name the main hazard: wind, water, lightning, heat, cold, visibility, or air quality?
- Do you know whether the page is explaining formation, detection, forecasting, safety, history, or recovery?
- Have you checked whether the official source is describing probability, observed damage, or immediate action?
- Can you identify the decision point: shelter, delay travel, evacuate, protect property, or keep monitoring?
- Do you have a second alert path if power, cell service, sirens, or internet access fail?
That checklist is intentionally conservative. Weather education is most valuable when it helps a reader make a calmer decision under pressure, not when it simply adds more dramatic storm vocabulary.
Tornado Hub articles are educational explainers and are not a live warning service. For immediate decisions, use official alerts from your local National Weather Service office, emergency management agency, or equivalent national weather authority.
How to read this guide
Every EF5 Tornado in US History is most useful when it is read as a decision guide, not just a definition. The goal is to connect the weather setup, the warning language, and the practical action a reader may need before conditions become dangerous.
What lesson survives after the event details change?
Read this history article as a case study. The value is not only the date, rating, or death toll, but how meteorology, warning access, exposure, buildings, and decisions combined.
What to compare with official guidance
Compare the article with official storm databases, post-event surveys, reputable archives, inflation-adjusted damage context, population exposure, and changes in warning technology.
Historical confidence depends on the era. Modern radar and surveys give more detail than older newspaper accounts, but even recent events can have revised damage or casualty information.
Decision checklist
- Identify the main hazard first: wind, water, lightning, heat, cold, visibility, air quality, or travel disruption.
- Check whether the article is explaining a forecast ingredient, an observed hazard, a safety action, or a historical lesson.
- Compare the page with the latest official warning, local emergency instruction, or agency update before acting.
- Decide what would change your plan: sheltering sooner, delaying travel, avoiding water, preparing for outage, or checking on someone vulnerable.
- Keep a backup alert path in case power, cell service, internet, sirens, or social media updates fail.
Change the interpretation if official surveys are revised, better archives become available, or newer research changes whether an event was one tornado, a tornado family, or a broader wind event.
This added section is part of Tornado Hub's broader article-quality pass. It is educational context, not a live warning. During active weather, use official alerts and local instructions first.
Field notes and source map
Every EF5 Tornado in US History benefits from one more layer of context: what evidence a reader should compare, what the official sources actually cover, and what practical decision the article should support. This added section is intentionally written like a newsroom sidebar: quick to scan, but deep enough to make the page more useful than a short definition.
A tornado article is strongest when it keeps four layers separate: the environment that supports rotation, the radar or spotter evidence that raises confidence, the warning language that communicates urgency, and the shelter decision a person has to make quickly.
When reading this page, ask what kind of statement is being made. A climatology statement tells you what is common, a warning statement tells you what is urgent, and a damage-rating statement describes what investigators found after the event.
What to check next
After reading this page, compare the article with the latest official information, the local terrain or building exposure, and the time window in which the hazard matters. A weather concept becomes useful when it changes one of those things: where you go, when you travel, how you shelter, what you monitor, or whether you wait for a safer window.
For readers coming from search, the key is to avoid treating one term as the whole answer. A headline may name the storm type, but the useful details are usually smaller: the warning wording, the observation trend, the affected road or coast, the people who need extra time, and the source that will update first.
Source trail
The source trail matters because tornado science mixes real-time warning operations with after-the-fact surveys. NOAA/NSSL and SPC explain the atmospheric side, while NWS safety guidance explains the action side.
- NOAA/NSSL Severe Weather 101: Tornadoes
- NOAA Storm Prediction Center tornado FAQ
- National Weather Service tornado safety
- NOAA Storm Events Database
These links are provided so readers can move from Tornado Hub's plain-English explanation to official meteorological, warning, safety, or archive sources.