Who is better, Bradman or Lanning?
Don Bradman leads with a GOAT score of 96.8 against 88.7 for Meg Lanning — a gap of 8.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Don Bradman above Meg Lanning: 96.8 vs 88.7. Don Bradman leads on Dominance, Statistics, Peak.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Bradman wins: Dominance, Peak, Longevity, Honours, Statistics
Lanning wins: no category outright
Shareable URL · /compare/don-bradman-vs-meg-lanning
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Bradman leads in 5 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇦🇺 Bradman | 0 | 0 | 0 | 66 | 395 | 803 |
| 🇦🇺 Lanning | 0 | 0 | 0 | 45 | 217 | 472 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 year periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | BradmanRetired | LanningRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Test batting average | 99.94 | — |
| Test centuries | 29 | — |
| Test runs | 6,996 | — |
| Test double centuries | 12 | — |
| Ashes series won as captain | 4 | — |
| World Cup titles | — | 7 |
| ODI centuries | — | 15 |
| International runs | — | 8,352 |
| ODI average | — | 53.51 |
| Commonwealth golds | — | 1 |
| Wins as captain | — | 150 |
| Dominance w25% | 100 | 88 |
| Peak w20% | 100 | 92 |
| Longevity w20% | 88 | 82 |
| Honours w20% | 96 | 92 |
| Statistics w15% | 100 | 90 |
Don Bradman leads with a GOAT score of 96.8 against 88.7 for Meg Lanning — a gap of 8.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Lanning does not lead any of the five categories; Bradman is ahead or level on all of them.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Bradman: 96.8, Lanning: 88.7.
Make your case for Bradman vs Lanning. 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.