GGOATRANK
AthletesTeams

Barnes vs Wyatt-Hodge

Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.

GOAT verdictgoatrank.world
Wyatt-HodgeWinner
83.7

Wyatt-Hodge wins: Longevity, Honours, Statistics

Barnes
83.6

Barnes wins: Dominance

Candidates
Locked to Cricket

Shareable URL · /compare/billy-barnes-vs-danni-wyatt

Time range

Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.

Category radar

Verdict

Weighted GOAT score
🇬🇧 Danni Wyatt-Hodge
83.7

Wyatt-Hodge leads in 4 of 5 weighted categories. England opener with more than 3,000 T20 international runs.

1. Danni Wyatt-Hodge
83.7
2. Billy Barnes
83.6

Category breakdown

Season form · Centuries per year

Career timeline · Centuries per year

Cumulative output season by season — the shape of each career against the other.

GOAT pace tracker

Career stage · GOAT pace

Through year 5 · Centuries per year
1. 🇬🇧 Billy Barnes5 years played · career day 1,825273 runs
Setting the pace at this stage
2. 🇬🇧 Danni Wyatt-Hodge5 years played · career day 1,825144 runs
-47.3% vs Barnes at the same stage
Ghost race · career day30100365100018253650
🇬🇧 Barnes004595273578
🇬🇧 Wyatt-Hodge001842144326

Careers are aligned at debut, so a rookie's first 5 years are measured against the same window in a legend's career — Yamal against Messi at the same age-stage, a tour rookie against Tiger Woods in 1996.

MetricBarnesRetiredWyatt-HodgeActive
Test runs725
Test wickets51
Test centuries1
First-class runs15,490
First-class wickets872
T20 World Cup titles1
T20I runs3,000
T20I centuries2
ODI runs1,500
International seasons15
Dominance w25%8076
Peak w20%8888
Longevity w20%8486
Honours w20%8082
Statistics w15%8890

Fan vote — data vs the people

GOAT Rank · the data
Wyatt-Hodge83.7
Barnes83.6
The people
Barnes
Wyatt-Hodge

Loading votes

Create a free account to vote and comment.

Sign in to vote

What do you think?

0 comments

Make your case for Barnes vs Wyatt-Hodge. 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.

More debates

Browse the rivalry hub →