Who is better, Fitzpatrick or Ashwin?
Cathryn Fitzpatrick leads with a GOAT score of 90.5 against 90.5 for Ravichandran Ashwin — 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 Cathryn Fitzpatrick and Ravichandran Ashwin level at 90.5. Cathryn Fitzpatrick leads on Longevity, Honours. Ravichandran Ashwin leads on Dominance, Statistics.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Fitzpatrick wins: Longevity, Honours
Ashwin wins: Dominance, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/cathryn-fitzpatrick-vs-ravichandran-ashwin
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Fitzpatrick 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇦🇺 Fitzpatrick | 0 | 0 | 8 | 20 | 74 | 151 |
| 🇮🇳 Ashwin | 0 | 0 | 0 | 22 | 134 | 331 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 year periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | FitzpatrickRetired | AshwinRetired |
|---|---|---|
| World Cup titles | 2 | — |
| ODI wickets | 180 | — |
| ODI bowling average | 16.79 | — |
| Test wickets | 60 | 537 |
| ODI matches | 109 | — |
| Five-wicket hauls | — | 37 |
| Test runs | — | 3,503 |
| T20 World Cup titles | — | 1 |
| Player of the Series awards | — | 11 |
| Dominance w25% | 88 | 90 |
| Peak w20% | 94 | 94 |
| Longevity w20% | 88 | 86 |
| Honours w20% | 90 | 88 |
| Statistics w15% | 94 | 96 |
Cathryn Fitzpatrick leads with a GOAT score of 90.5 against 90.5 for Ravichandran Ashwin — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Ashwin scores higher on dominance, statistics. Fitzpatrick leads on honours, longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Fitzpatrick: 90.5, Ashwin: 90.5.
Make your case for Fitzpatrick vs Ashwin. 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.