Who is better, Bergeret or Hayata?
Claude Bergeret leads with a GOAT score of 80.2 against 80.2 for Hina Hayata — 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 Claude Bergeret and Hina Hayata level at 80.2. Claude Bergeret leads on Longevity, Peak, Statistics. Hina Hayata leads on Dominance, Honours.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Bergeret wins: Peak, Longevity, Statistics
Hayata wins: Dominance, Honours
Shareable URL · /compare/claude-bergeret-vs-hina-hayata
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Bergeret 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇫🇷 Bergeret | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 30 |
| 🇯🇵 Hayata | 0 | 0 | 55 | 119 | 269 | 719 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | BergeretRetired | HayataActive |
|---|---|---|
| World titles | 1 | — |
| European medals | 3 | — |
| French national titles | 9 | — |
| World Championship appearances | 7 | — |
| Career span in years | 15 | — |
| Olympic medals | — | 2 |
| World Championship medals | — | 2 |
| Japanese national titles | — | 2 |
| WTT titles | — | 4 |
| Career high world ranking | — | 4 |
| Dominance w25% | 72 | 78 |
| Peak w20% | 90 | 88 |
| Longevity w20% | 80 | 72 |
| Honours w20% | 78 | 82 |
| Statistics w15% | 84 | 82 |
Claude Bergeret leads with a GOAT score of 80.2 against 80.2 for Hina Hayata — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Hayata scores higher on dominance, honours. Bergeret leads on peak, statistics, longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Bergeret: 80.2, Hayata: 80.2.
Make your case for Bergeret vs Hayata. 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.