<p>Equality is a fundamental moral concept, yet its precise nature and practical implications remain controversial. In romantic relationships, discussions of equality typically center on two key dimensions: (a) equal status and autonomy, and (b) equal personal value. While the first is largely undisputed, the second—on which this article focuses—is more complex and divisive. I propose that a partner’s overall personal value can be assessed using two scales: (a) a nonrelational meritocracy scale, and (b) a relational suitability scale. Because romantic relationships unfold within specific life frameworks—which are inherently unequal—individuals often make romantic compromises, sacrificing romantic value for improved living conditions. Given that high scores on both scales can enhance personal flourishing, would we truly want a partner who is wiser or more attractive than ourselves? The conceptual analysis presented here, supported by empirical findings, offers important insights into sustaining enduring and fulfilling romantic relationships.</p>