Who is better, Deng or Harimoto?
Deng Yaping leads with a GOAT score of 91.4 against 81.8 for Miwa Harimoto — a gap of 9.6 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Deng Yaping above Miwa Harimoto: 91.4 vs 81.8. Deng Yaping leads on Dominance, Honours, Statistics.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Deng wins: Dominance, Peak, Longevity, Honours, Statistics
Harimoto wins: no category outright
Shareable URL · /compare/deng-yaping-vs-miwa-harimoto
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Deng leads in 5 of 5 weighted categories.
Harimoto — Insufficient verified career data to calculate a reliable GOAT Score.
Cumulative output season by season — the shape of each career against the other.
Setting the pace at age 21
No verified birth date for Harimoto — shown in the pro-debut view instead.
Every career is cut at the season the athlete turned 21, so a rookie today is measured against exactly what a legend had banked by the same birthday.
| Metric | DengRetired | HarimotoActive |
|---|---|---|
| Olympic golds | 4 | — |
| World titles | 18 | — |
| Years at No. 1 | 8 | — |
| World Cup titles | 2 | — |
| Singles world titles | 3 | — |
| Seasons at elite level | 10 | — |
| National titles | — | 2 |
| WTT titles | — | 4 |
| World Championship medals | — | 2 |
| World ranking peak | — | 3 |
| Asian Championship medals | — | 3 |
| Dominance w25% | 97 | 82 |
| Peak w20% | 97 | 92 |
| Longevity w20% | 74 | 68 |
| Honours w20% | 94 | 82 |
| Statistics w15% | 94 | 86 |
Deng Yaping leads with a GOAT score of 91.4 against 81.8 for Miwa Harimoto — a gap of 9.6 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Harimoto does not lead any of the five categories; Deng is ahead or level on all of them.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Deng: 91.4, Harimoto: 81.8.
Make your case for Deng vs Harimoto. 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.