Who is better, Arshavin or Girma?
Andrei Arshavin leads with a GOAT score of 77.6 against 77.6 for Naomi Girma — 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 Andrei Arshavin and Naomi Girma level at 77.6. Andrei Arshavin leads on Longevity. Naomi Girma leads on Dominance, Peak, Statistics.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Arshavin wins: Longevity
Girma wins: Dominance, Peak, Honours, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/andrei-arshavin-vs-naomi-girma
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Arshavin leads in 1 of 5 weighted categories.
Cumulative output season by season — the shape of each career against the other.
| Ghost race · career day | 30 | 100 | 365 | 1000 | 1825 | 3650 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇷🇺 Arshavin | 0 | 0 | 2 | 7 | 23 | 79 |
| 🇺🇸 Girma | 0 | 0 | 20 | 42 | 81 | 81 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | ArshavinRetired | GirmaActive |
|---|---|---|
| UEFA Cup titles | 1 | — |
| UEFA Super Cup titles | 1 | — |
| Russian Premier League titles | 2 | — |
| Russia caps | 75 | — |
| Russia goals | 17 | — |
| Olympic gold medals | — | 1 |
| NWSL Defender of the Year awards | — | 2 |
| NWSL Rookie of the Year awards | — | 1 |
| USA caps | — | 50 |
| Women's Super League titles | — | 1 |
| Dominance w25% | 76 | 80 |
| Peak w20% | 86 | 90 |
| Longevity w20% | 76 | 62 |
| Honours w20% | 74 | 76 |
| Statistics w15% | 76 | 80 |
Andrei Arshavin leads with a GOAT score of 77.6 against 77.6 for Naomi Girma — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Girma scores higher on peak, dominance, honours, statistics. Arshavin leads on longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Arshavin: 77.6, Girma: 77.6.
Make your case for Arshavin vs Girma. 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.