MBTI ranking
Compare all 16 MBTI types on holding grudges. See why INFJ, ISFJ, INTJ appear near the front, what the order measures, and which real-life factors can change it.
Top 3
#1
INFJ
A tendency to read subtext closely while keeping much of the reaction private is the reason INFJ enters this holding grudges list where it does. The visible choice is whether to keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition. Near the top, INFJ has a preference that can support holding grudges before outside demands are considered. A real case may say more about boundaries than about INFJ's place here.
#2
ISFJ
ISFJ's usual move is to lead with practical care and careful memory. That becomes relevant when an old injury is remembered when the same person asks for trust again and the person may keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition. That combination puts ISFJ near the front for holding grudges, although the rank is not a measure of merit. The number remains conditional on trauma, even when the preference description fits.
#3
INTJ
This holding grudges article gives INTJ a scene where the type tends to draw on strategy and independent judgment before choosing. That starting point may support the ranked behavior. The number gives INTJ a high starting estimate for holding grudges, not a better character or guaranteed result. A real case may say more about repair than about INTJ's place here.
Continue with the INFJ type guide, ISFJ type guide, and INTJ type guide to compare how those preferences appear outside this topic.
Complete ranking
#1
INFJ
A tendency to read subtext closely while keeping much of the reaction private is the reason INFJ enters this holding grudges list where it does. The visible choice is whether to keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition. Near the top, INFJ has a preference that can support holding grudges before outside demands are considered. A real case may say more about boundaries than about INFJ's place here.
#2
ISFJ
ISFJ's usual move is to lead with practical care and careful memory. That becomes relevant when an old injury is remembered when the same person asks for trust again and the person may keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition. That combination puts ISFJ near the front for holding grudges, although the rank is not a measure of merit. The number remains conditional on trauma, even when the preference description fits.
#3
INTJ
This holding grudges article gives INTJ a scene where the type tends to draw on strategy and independent judgment before choosing. That starting point may support the ranked behavior. The number gives INTJ a high starting estimate for holding grudges, not a better character or guaranteed result. A real case may say more about repair than about INTJ's place here.
#4
INFP
This holding grudges article gives INFP a scene where the type tends to keep acceptance, sincerity, and time to open up in view. That starting point may support the ranked behavior. This article places INFP toward the front because its first response suits the stated holding grudges behavior. The number remains conditional on severity, even when the preference description fits.
#5
ISTJ
When an old injury is remembered when the same person asks for trust again, ISTJ tends to keep clear expectations and trustworthy behavior in view. That can make the person more likely to keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition. The middle estimate reflects how ISTJ may reach the move to keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition only under particular conditions. Accountability may still move ISTJ away from this estimate.
#6
ENFJ
ENFJ's usual move is to read participation quickly and help a group find common ground. That becomes relevant when an old injury is remembered when the same person asks for trust again and the person may keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition. The type lands between the clearer ends of holding grudges because its preference can support more than one response. The number remains conditional on whether the pattern continued, even when the preference description fits.
#7
ISFP
In the specific case where an old injury is remembered when the same person asks for trust again, ISFP may keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition because the type tends to protect gentleness, freedom, and sincere attention. The middle estimate reflects how ISFP may reach the move to keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition only under particular conditions. A real case may say more about whether the pattern continued than about ISFP's place here.
#8
ENTJ
This holding grudges article gives ENTJ a scene where the type tends to lead with decisive planning and coordination. That starting point may support the ranked behavior. ENTJ may keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition strongly in one setting and barely at all in another, which suits a middle rank. Trauma may still move ENTJ away from this estimate.
#9
ESTJ
ESTJ tends to work toward the aim to keep people and resources working in order. In a moment when an old injury is remembered when the same person asks for trust again, that preference can lead the person to keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition. For holding grudges, ESTJ has no single automatic route; purpose and consequence can shift the choice. The number remains conditional on time, even when the preference description fits.
#10
ESFJ
A tendency to work toward the aim to create belonging people can feel is the reason ESFJ enters this holding grudges list where it does. The visible choice is whether to keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition. This puts ESFJ in the broad holding grudges middle, where context is more informative than the number. Boundaries may still move ESFJ away from this estimate.
#11
INTP
A tendency to let the drive to understand the principle behind the problem organize the response is the reason INTP enters this holding grudges list where it does. The visible choice is whether to keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition. The middle estimate reflects how INTP may reach the move to keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition only under particular conditions. A real case may say more about accountability than about INTP's place here.
#12
ISTP
When an old injury is remembered when the same person asks for trust again, ISTP tends to balance practical diagnosis and calm action against the situation's cost. That can make the person more likely to keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition. The type lands between the clearer ends of holding grudges because its preference can support more than one response. For ISTP, check severity before treating the position as stable.
#13
ENTP
When an old injury is remembered when the same person asks for trust again, ENTP tends to let the drive to explore what could work differently organize the response. That can make the person more likely to keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition. This holding grudges list places ENTP near the back because the type may solve the stated moment through a different first action. Time may still move ENTP away from this estimate.
#14
ENFP
For ENFP, the holding grudges question begins with a tendency to draw on encouragement and creative association before choosing. The article's scene tests whether that becomes the move to keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition. This holding grudges list places ENFP near the back because the type may solve the stated moment through a different first action. A real case may say more about repair than about ENFP's place here.
#15
ESFP
ESFP's usual move is to let the drive to make life feel present and shared organize the response. That becomes relevant when an old injury is remembered when the same person asks for trust again and the person may keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition. The lower position says that keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition may be a less automatic response for ESFP; it says nothing about ability or character. For ESFP, check accountability before treating the position as stable.
#16
ESTP
In the specific case where an old injury is remembered when the same person asks for trust again, ESTP may keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition because the type tends to lead with quick judgment and practical courage. ESTP receives a low starting estimate only for this topic and can still learn or choose the ranked response when circumstances require it. Repair may still move ESTP away from this estimate.
How to read this ranking
The comparison begins at one decision point: an old injury is remembered when the same person asks for trust again. Holding grudges is the tendency to answer that moment by choosing to keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition. The order stays useful only while it remains narrower than the person. It suggests who may be more ready to keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition, then leaves room for learning, principle, and consequence to change the answer.
Several forces can imitate or suppress holding grudges: repair, accountability, trauma, time, boundaries, severity, and whether the pattern continued. They change the opportunity and consequence around holding grudges in different ways. Repeated choices about whether to keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition are stronger evidence than one dramatic case under unusual pressure.
Follow the whole sequence. Notice what the person sees first when an old injury is remembered when the same person asks for trust again, what consequence they try to avoid, and whether the choice to keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition brings energy, strain, relief, or regret. The same action can come from preference, duty, fear, practice, or a lack of alternatives.
A practical reading starts with the fork in the road when an old injury is remembered when the same person asks for trust again: to keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition, or to choose another response. Write down what each option protects and costs. Repair may decide which option is realistic; accountability may explain why one consequence matters more; trauma may affect how much room the person has to reconsider. Now compare that case with a lower-stakes version of holding grudges. If the same first move returns voluntarily and with less strain, preference becomes a reasonable part of the explanation. If it disappears, the original setting was probably doing more work than the type code.
Read number 1 for INFJ as a topic-specific placement. Its tendency to balance insight and patient emotional attention against the situation's cost may shape the choice when an old injury is remembered when the same person asks for trust again. A private idealist who pays close attention to motives and meaning. That description is broader than holding grudges, especially when the situation involving accountability changes the choice to keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition.
When an old injury is remembered when the same person asks for trust again, number 2 ISFJ tends to balance practical care and careful memory against the situation's cost. That preference gives the type a recognizable route into holding grudges. A considerate caretaker who remembers the details of daily life. That description is broader than holding grudges, especially when the situation involving trauma changes the choice to keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition.
At number 3, INTJ tends to work toward the aim to build systems that hold up over time. In holding grudges, that can support the choice to keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition when an old injury is remembered when the same person asks for trust again. The type also needs honesty, depth, and room to think. After considering time, that need can pull the later decision away from the ranked move to keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition.
At 4, INFP prefers to protect acceptance, sincerity, and time to open up. After considering boundaries, another priority may take precedence over the move to keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition. ISTJ appears at 5 through a tendency to keep clear expectations and trustworthy behavior in view. Even so, whether the pattern continued can move the person away from the ranked response. Read ENFJ at 6 through its tendency to work toward the aim to help people grow together. After considering accountability, the same preference may produce another sensible response. This holding grudges order places ISFP at 7 because the type tends to balance sensitivity and flexible practical action against the situation's cost. The estimate remains conditional on time.
Number 8, ENTJ, starts by trying to enter a group ready to shape direction and make useful connections. When considering trauma, that may or may not lead the person to keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition. ESTJ at 9 tends to protect respect, plain speech, and shared responsibility. In holding grudges, boundaries can strengthen or weaken that route. This holding grudges order places ESFJ at 10 because the type tends to lead with social awareness and dependable support. The estimate remains conditional on whether the pattern continued.
INTP reaches 11 by tending to balance analysis and original connections against the situation's cost. Check boundaries before expecting the move to keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition. For ISTP, position 12 reflects a tendency to balance practical diagnosis and calm action against the situation's cost. Even here, whether the pattern continued can change what that approach achieves in holding grudges. This holding grudges order places ENTP at 13 because the type tends to draw on inventive reasoning and fast adaptation before choosing. The estimate remains conditional on accountability.
ENFP reaches 14 by tending to balance encouragement and creative association against the situation's cost. Check accountability before expecting the move to keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition. For ESFP, position 15 reflects a tendency to work toward the aim to make life feel present and shared. Even here, time can change what that approach achieves in holding grudges. For ESTP, position 16 reflects a tendency to draw on quick judgment and practical courage before choosing. Even here, severity can change what that approach achieves in holding grudges.
Turn the holding grudges ranking into a prediction about the next time an old injury is remembered when the same person asks for trust again. State the expected move in plain language, then watch without forcing the answer. Personality language should remain easier to correct than the person in front of you.
Common questions
No holding grudges list can predict one person from four letters. This page asks how preference might affect the move to keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition, while leaving the actual answer open to the scene.
No. This holding grudges list estimates readiness to keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition, not worth or overall competence. A lower-ranked first move may suit the same scene better.
Your repeated behavior and stated reasons matter more. The number is useful only as a question about why you may or may not keep the unresolved harm active as protection against repetition in the scene described here.
Editorial note
This is an editorial ordering of common MBTI preferences, not a scientific measurement, diagnosis, or verdict about an individual. Role, culture, resources, health, experience, and the immediate situation can outweigh type.
Related rankings
Bringing up old issues: all 16 MBTI types ranked
All 16 types compared on bringing up old issues, with a reason for each position and a warning that readiness to connect today's conflict to earlier evidence is not a personal score.
Which MBTI types rank highest for silent conflict?
A full 16-type look at silent conflict, with INTJ, ISTJ, INFJ in the Top 3 and a practical explanation of what the numbers can and cannot tell you.
MBTI comforting others: a ranking of all 16 types
A full 16-type look at comforting others, with INFJ, ENFJ, ISFJ in the Top 3 and a practical explanation of what the numbers can and cannot tell you.
All 16 MBTI types ranked for fear of awkwardness
ISFJ, INFJ, ESFJ lead this fear of awkwardness ranking. The article follows all 16 types and checks the result against ordinary situations.