It is unclear if the Functional Movement Screen (FMS) scoring criteria identify kinematics that have been associated with lower extremity injury risk. The purpose was to compare lower extremity kinematics of the overhead deep squat (OHDS) during the FMS between individuals who were grouped on FMS scoring. Forty-five adults who were free of injury and without knowledge of the FMS or its scoring criteria (males = 19, females = 26; height = 1.68 0.08 m; mass = 70.7 7 13.0 kg). Three-dimensional lower extremity kinematics during an OHDS were measured using a motion capture system. One-way MANOVA was used to compare kinematic outcomes (peak hip flexion angle, hip adduction angle, knee flexion angle, knee abduction angle, knee internal rotation angle, and ankle dorsiflexion angle) between FMS groups. Those who scored a 3 had greater peak hip flexion angle (F_2,42 = 8.75; p = 0.001), knee flexion angle (F_2,42 = 13.53; p = 0.001), knee internal rotation angle (F_2,42 = 12.91; p = 0.001), and dorsiflexion angle (F_2,42 = 9.00; p = 0.001) compared to those who scored a 2 or a 1. However, no differences were found in any outcome between those who scored a 2 and those who scored a 1, or in frontal plane hip or knee kinematics. FMS scoring for the OHDS identified differences in squat depth, which was characterized by larger peak hip, knee, and dorsi- flexion angles in those who scored a 3 compared with those who scored 2 or 1. However, no differences were found between those who scored a 2 or 1, and caution is recommended when interpreting these scores. Despite a different FMS score, few differences were observed in frontal or transverse plane hip and knee kinematics, and other tasks may be needed to assess frontal plane kinematics.

• The FMS scoring criteria of the OHDS largely identified differences in squat depth

• Other tasks are needed to evaluate frontal and transverse plane movement patterns.

• The FMS scoring criteria of the OHDS may be unable to categorize individuals across 3 levels, and caution is needed when comparing scores of 2 and 1.Kinematic evaluations should not be limited to the peak value, as kinematic differences between scoring FMS categories is evident throughout the OHDS.