Who is better, Schmidt or Nalbert?
Bruno Schmidt leads with a GOAT score of 86.3 against 86.3 for Nalbert Bitencourt — 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 Bruno Schmidt and Nalbert Bitencourt level at 86.3. Bruno Schmidt leads on Dominance, Peak, Statistics. Nalbert Bitencourt leads on Longevity, Honours.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Schmidt wins: Dominance, Peak, Statistics
Nalbert wins: Longevity, Honours
Shareable URL · /compare/bruno-schmidt-vs-nalbert-bitencourt
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Schmidt 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇧🇷 Schmidt | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 15 | 38 |
| 🇧🇷 Nalbert | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 44 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | SchmidtActive | NalbertRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Olympic gold medals | 1 | — |
| World Championship titles | 1 | — |
| World Tour titles | 25 | — |
| World Tour Finals titles | 2 | — |
| Best player awards | 2 | — |
| Olympic golds | — | 1 |
| World League titles | — | 5 |
| World Championship medals | — | 1 |
| World Cup titles | — | 1 |
| MVP awards | — | 2 |
| Dominance w25% | 86 | 84 |
| Peak w20% | 94 | 92 |
| Longevity w20% | 78 | 82 |
| Honours w20% | 86 | 88 |
| Statistics w15% | 88 | 86 |
Bruno Schmidt leads with a GOAT score of 86.3 against 86.3 for Nalbert Bitencourt — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Nalbert scores higher on honours, longevity. Schmidt leads on peak, dominance, statistics.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Schmidt: 86.3, Nalbert: 86.3.
Make your case for Schmidt vs Nalbert. 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.