Who is better, Baggio or Hooper?
Charmaine Hooper leads with a GOAT score of 85.0 against 84.9 for Roberto Baggio — 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 Charmaine Hooper above Roberto Baggio: 85.0 vs 84.9. Charmaine Hooper leads on Statistics, Longevity, Peak. Roberto Baggio leads on Honours, Dominance.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Hooper wins: Peak, Longevity, Statistics
Baggio wins: Dominance, Honours
Shareable URL · /compare/baggio-vs-charmaine-hooper-v
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Hooper leads in 3 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇮🇹 Baggio | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 59 |
| 🇨🇦 Hooper | 0 | 0 | 50 | 104 | 286 | 578 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | BaggioRetired | HooperRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Career goals | 318 | — |
| Ballon d'Or | 1 | — |
| Serie A titles | 2 | — |
| UEFA Cups | 1 | — |
| International caps | 56 | — |
| International goals | 27 | — |
| Canada caps | — | 129 |
| Canada goals | — | 71 |
| World Cup appearances | — | 4 |
| W-League titles | — | 2 |
| Career club goals | — | 150 |
| Dominance w25% | 84 | 82 |
| Peak w20% | 88 | 89 |
| Longevity w20% | 84 | 86 |
| Honours w20% | 83 | 80 |
| Statistics w15% | 86 | 90 |
Charmaine Hooper leads with a GOAT score of 85.0 against 84.9 for Roberto Baggio — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Baggio scores higher on dominance, honours. Hooper leads on peak, statistics, longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Baggio: 84.9, Hooper: 85.0.
Make your case for Baggio vs Hooper. 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.