Jump performance provides meaningful information both for sporting and clinical needs. Current state-of-the-art in jump performance assessment is laboratory-bound, however, out-of-the-laboratory methods are desirable. Therefore, the purposes of the present investigation were 1) to explore whether utilising a novel analytical approach minimises the bias between inertial recording unit (IMU)-based and jump mat-based jump height estimates, and 2) to provide a thorough tutorial for a sport scientist (see appendix) to facilitate standardisation of jump height estimation. Forty one women, men and boys aged 6 to 77 years-of-age completed three maximal counter movement jumps without arm swing, which were concurrently registered with a jump mat, and an IMU worn in low lumbar region. Excellent agreement between the novel IMU-based jump height and jump mat jump height was observed (mean IMU 22.6 [8.3] cm, mean jump mat 22.7 [8.9], mean bias -0.1 cm [95% limits of agreement -4.5 cm to 4.4 cm; p = 0.826], intra-class correlation coefficient 0.97 [95% CI 0.94 to 0.98, p < 0.001]). In conclusion, inertial recordings conducted with lightweight IMUs worn on the hip provide a valid and feasible assessment of jump height among people with varying athletic ability. Inertial signals have the potential to afford (at least semi-) automated analysis pipeline with low labour cost thus being potentially feasible in applied settings such as in professional sports or in the clinics.