Who is better, Cook or Bradman?
Don Bradman leads with a GOAT score of 96.8 against 89.9 for Alastair Cook — a gap of 6.9 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
AthletesTeams
Cook vs Bradman
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Don Bradman above Alastair Cook: 96.8 vs 89.9. Don Bradman leads on Dominance, Peak, Honours. Alastair Cook leads on Longevity.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →GOAT verdictgoatrank.world
BradmanWinner
96.8Bradman wins: Dominance, Peak, Honours, Statistics
Cook
89.9Cook wins: Longevity
Candidates
Locked to CricketShareable URL · /compare/alastair-cook-vs-don-bradman
Time range
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Category radar
Verdict
Weighted GOAT score
🇦🇺 Don Bradman
96.8
Bradman leads in 4 of 5 weighted categories.
1. Don Bradman
2. Alastair Cook
Category breakdown
Season form · Form index per season
Career timeline · Form index per season
Cumulative output season by season — the shape of each career against the other.
GOAT pace tracker
Career stage · GOAT pace
Through year 5 · Form index per season1. 🇦🇺 Don Bradman5 years played · career day 2,191505 runs
Setting the pace at this stage
2. 🏴 Alastair Cook5 years played · career day 1,825280 runs
-44.6% vs Bradman at the same stage
| Ghost race · career day | 30 | 100 | 365 | 1000 | 1825 | 3650 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🏴 Cook | 0 | 0 | 40 | 88 | 280 | 630 |
| 🇦🇺 Bradman | 0 | 0 | 0 | 66 | 395 | 803 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 year periods are measured against the same career window.
Fan vote — data vs the people
GOAT Rank · the data
Bradman96.8
Cook89.9
FAQ
Where does Cook beat Bradman?
Cook scores higher on longevity. Bradman leads on peak, dominance, honours, statistics.
How is the Cook vs Bradman score calculated?
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Cook: 89.9, Bradman: 96.8.
What do you think?
0 commentsMake your case for Cook vs Bradman. 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.