Who is better, Buschschulte or Hackett?
Antje Buschschulte leads with a GOAT score of 86.3 against 86.2 for Grant Hackett — 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 Antje Buschschulte above Grant Hackett: 86.3 vs 86.2. Antje Buschschulte leads on Longevity, Statistics. Grant Hackett leads on Dominance.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Buschschulte wins: Longevity, Statistics
Hackett wins: Dominance
Shareable URL · /compare/antje-buschschulte-vs-grant-hackett
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Buschschulte 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇩🇪 Buschschulte | 0 | 0 | 40 | 86 | 256 | 560 |
| 🇦🇺 Hackett | 0 | 0 | 0 | 890 | 2,655 | 7,037.56 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | BuschschulteRetired | HackettRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Olympic medals | 7 | 7 |
| European titles | 9 | — |
| World Championship medals | 8 | — |
| Olympic Games contested | 4 | — |
| German titles | 40 | — |
| Olympic golds | — | 3 |
| World Championship golds | — | 10 |
| World records | — | 2 |
| 1500 m best (s) | — | 874.56 |
| Unbeaten years at 1500 m | — | 10 |
| Dominance w25% | 80 | 84 |
| Peak w20% | 90 | 90 |
| Longevity w20% | 88 | 84 |
| Honours w20% | 86 | 86 |
| Statistics w15% | 90 | 88 |
Antje Buschschulte leads with a GOAT score of 86.3 against 86.2 for Grant Hackett — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Hackett scores higher on dominance. Buschschulte leads on statistics, longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Buschschulte: 86.3, Hackett: 86.2.
Make your case for Buschschulte vs Hackett. 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.