Who is better, Shevchenko or Akers?
Michelle Akers leads with a GOAT score of 89.0 against 88.9 for Andriy Shevchenko — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Michelle Akers above Andriy Shevchenko: 89.0 vs 88.9. Michelle Akers leads on Dominance, Peak, Honours. Andriy Shevchenko leads on Longevity.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Akers wins: Dominance, Peak, Honours
Shevchenko wins: Longevity
Shareable URL · /compare/andriy-shevchenko-vs-michelle-akers
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Akers leads in 4 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇺🇦 Shevchenko | 0 | 0 | 55 | 115 | 322 | 663 |
| 🇺🇸 Akers | 0 | 0 | 50 | 108 | 330 | 691 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | ShevchenkoRetired | AkersRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Ballon d'Or awards | 1 | — |
| Champions League titles | 1 | — |
| Serie A titles | 1 | — |
| Career goals | 339 | — |
| Serie A top-scorer awards | 2 | — |
| World Cup titles | — | 2 |
| World Cup Golden Boot awards | — | 1 |
| Olympic gold medals | — | 1 |
| USA goals | — | 105 |
| USA caps | — | 153 |
| Dominance w25% | 86 | 88 |
| Peak w20% | 94 | 96 |
| Longevity w20% | 84 | 78 |
| Honours w20% | 90 | 92 |
| Statistics w15% | 92 | 92 |
Michelle Akers leads with a GOAT score of 89.0 against 88.9 for Andriy Shevchenko — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shevchenko scores higher on longevity. Akers leads on peak, dominance, honours.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Shevchenko: 88.9, Akers: 89.0.
Make your case for Shevchenko vs Akers. 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.