Who is better, Sörenstam or Love III?
Annika Sörenstam leads with a GOAT score of 92.8 against 86.4 for Davis Love III — a gap of 6.4 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Annika Sörenstam above Davis Love III: 92.8 vs 86.4. Annika Sörenstam leads on Dominance, Honours, Statistics. Davis Love III leads on Longevity.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Sörenstam wins: Dominance, Peak, Honours, Statistics
Love III wins: Longevity
Shareable URL · /compare/annika-sorenstam-vs-davis-love-iii
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Sörenstam leads in 4 of 5 weighted categories.
Love III — Insufficient verified career data to calculate a reliable GOAT Score.
Cumulative output season by season — the shape of each career against the other.
Setting the pace at age 24
No verified birth date for Love III — shown in the pro-debut view instead.
Every career is cut at the season the athlete turned 24, so a rookie today is measured against exactly what a legend had banked by the same birthday.
| Metric | SörenstamRetired | Love IIIActive |
|---|---|---|
| Major titles | 10 | 1 |
| LPGA wins | 72 | — |
| Player of the Year awards | 8 | — |
| Vare Trophies | 6 | — |
| Career prize money (M USD) | 22.6 | — |
| Weeks at No. 1 | 60 | — |
| PGA Tour wins | — | 21 |
| Players Championships | — | 1 |
| Ryder Cup appearances | — | 6 |
| Ryder Cup captaincies | — | 2 |
| Dominance w25% | 95 | 80 |
| Peak w20% | 96 | 90 |
| Longevity w20% | 84 | 92 |
| Honours w20% | 94 | 84 |
| Statistics w15% | 95 | 88 |
Annika Sörenstam leads with a GOAT score of 92.8 against 86.4 for Davis Love III — a gap of 6.4 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Love III scores higher on longevity. Sörenstam leads on peak, dominance, honours, statistics.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Sörenstam: 92.8, Love III: 86.4.
Make your case for Sörenstam vs Love III. 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.