Who is better, Bonmatí or Angerer?
Aitana Bonmatí leads with a GOAT score of 89.4 against 89.4 for Nadine Angerer — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently scores Aitana Bonmatí and Nadine Angerer level at 89.4. Aitana Bonmatí leads on Dominance, Statistics, Peak. Nadine Angerer leads on Longevity, Honours.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Bonmatí wins: Dominance, Peak, Statistics
Angerer wins: Longevity, Honours
Shareable URL · /compare/aitana-bonmati-vs-nadine-angerer
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Bonmatí leads in 3 of 5 weighted categories.
Cumulative output season by season — the shape of each career against the other.
Setting the pace at age 21
No verified birth date for Angerer — shown in the pro-debut view instead.
Every career is cut at the season the athlete turned 21, so a rookie today is measured against exactly what a legend had banked by the same birthday.
| Metric | BonmatíActive | AngererRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Ballon d'Or Féminin | 3 | — |
| Champions League titles | 3 | — |
| World Cup titles | 1 | 2 |
| World Cup Golden Ball | 1 | — |
| Liga F titles | 6 | — |
| Spain caps | 90 | — |
| FIFA World Player awards | — | 1 |
| European Championship titles | — | 6 |
| Germany caps | — | 146 |
| World Cup minutes without conceding | — | 540 |
| Dominance w25% | 94 | 84 |
| Peak w20% | 95 | 94 |
| Longevity w20% | 76 | 90 |
| Honours w20% | 90 | 92 |
| Statistics w15% | 91 | 88 |
Aitana Bonmatí leads with a GOAT score of 89.4 against 89.4 for Nadine Angerer — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Angerer scores higher on honours, longevity. Bonmatí leads on peak, dominance, statistics.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Bonmatí: 89.4, Angerer: 89.4.
Make your case for Bonmatí vs Angerer. The scoring is published in full — if you can point at the pillar or the weight you disagree with, we read it. Read the methodology paper.