Who is better, Cook or Hobbs?
Jack Hobbs leads with a GOAT score of 90.6 against 89.9 for Alastair Cook — a gap of 0.7 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
AthletesTeams
Cook vs Hobbs
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Jack Hobbs above Alastair Cook: 90.6 vs 89.9. Jack Hobbs leads on Dominance, Longevity. Alastair Cook leads on Honours, Statistics.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →GOAT verdictgoatrank.world
HobbsWinner
90.6Hobbs wins: Dominance, Longevity
Cook
89.9Cook wins: Honours, Statistics
Candidates
Locked to CricketShareable URL · /compare/alastair-cook-vs-jack-hobbs
Time range
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Category radar
Verdict
Weighted GOAT score
🏴 Jack Hobbs
90.6
Hobbs leads in 3 of 5 weighted categories.
1. Jack Hobbs
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. 🏴 Alastair Cook5 years played · career day 1,825280 runs
Setting the pace at this stage
2. 🏴 Jack Hobbs5 years played · career day 2,55529 runs
-89.6% vs Cook at the same stage
| Ghost race · career day | 30 | 100 | 365 | 1000 | 1825 | 3650 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🏴 Cook | 0 | 0 | 40 | 88 | 280 | 630 |
| 🏴 Hobbs | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 49 |
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
Hobbs90.6
Cook89.9
FAQ
Where does Cook beat Hobbs?
Cook scores higher on honours, statistics. Hobbs leads on dominance, longevity.
How is the Cook vs Hobbs score calculated?
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Cook: 89.9, Hobbs: 90.6.
What do you think?
0 commentsMake your case for Cook vs Hobbs. 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.