Who is better, Lingmerth or Niemann?
David Lingmerth leads with a GOAT score of 75.0 against 74.8 for Joaquín Niemann — a gap of 0.2 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks David Lingmerth above Joaquín Niemann: 75.0 vs 74.8. David Lingmerth leads on Longevity, Statistics. Joaquín Niemann leads on Dominance, Honours.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Lingmerth wins: Longevity, Statistics
Niemann wins: Dominance, Honours
Shareable URL · /compare/david-lingmerth-vs-joaquin-niemann
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Lingmerth 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇸🇪 Lingmerth | 0 | 0 | 0 | 280 | 650 | 1,051 |
| 🇨🇱 Niemann | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 10 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | LingmerthActive | NiemannActive |
|---|---|---|
| PGA Tour wins | 1 | 2 |
| Korn Ferry Tour wins | 2 | — |
| Highest world ranking | 56 | — |
| PGA Tour top-ten finishes | 12 | — |
| Professional years | 14 | — |
| LIV Golf wins | — | 7 |
| Presidents Cup appearances | — | 3 |
| Career-high world ranking | — | 15 |
| Professional wins | — | 11 |
| Dominance w25% | 66 | 74 |
| Peak w20% | 86 | 86 |
| Longevity w20% | 78 | 62 |
| Honours w20% | 64 | 72 |
| Statistics w15% | 86 | 82 |
David Lingmerth leads with a GOAT score of 75.0 against 74.8 for Joaquín Niemann — a gap of 0.2 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Niemann scores higher on dominance, honours. Lingmerth leads on statistics, longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Lingmerth: 75.0, Niemann: 74.8.
Make your case for Lingmerth vs Niemann. 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.