Who is better, Eaton or Bergqvist?
Ashton Eaton leads with a GOAT score of 85.8 against 85.8 for Kajsa Bergqvist — 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 Ashton Eaton and Kajsa Bergqvist level at 85.8. Ashton Eaton leads on Dominance, Honours, Statistics. Kajsa Bergqvist leads on Longevity.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Eaton wins: Dominance, Honours, Statistics
Bergqvist wins: Longevity
Shareable URL · /compare/ashton-eaton-vs-kajsa-bergqvist
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Eaton 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇺🇸 Eaton | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 17,186 | 61,970 |
| 🇸🇪 Bergqvist | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5.88 | 13.88 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | EatonRetired | BergqvistRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Olympic golds | 2 | — |
| World Championship golds | 2 | 1 |
| World records | 2 | — |
| Decathlon best | 9,045 | — |
| Heptathlon world records | 2 | — |
| World indoor golds | 2 | — |
| Olympic medals | — | 1 |
| World indoor titles | — | 2 |
| Indoor world record | — | 2.08 |
| Outdoor personal best | — | 2.06 |
| Dominance w25% | 86 | 84 |
| Peak w20% | 92 | 92 |
| Longevity w20% | 74 | 80 |
| Honours w20% | 88 | 86 |
| Statistics w15% | 90 | 88 |
Ashton Eaton leads with a GOAT score of 85.8 against 85.8 for Kajsa Bergqvist — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Bergqvist scores higher on longevity. Eaton leads on dominance, honours, statistics.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Eaton: 85.8, Bergqvist: 85.8.
Make your case for Eaton vs Bergqvist. 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.