Who is better, Arévalo or Ingebrigtsen?
Éider Arévalo leads with a GOAT score of 81.9 against 81.9 for Jakob Ingebrigtsen — 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 Éider Arévalo and Jakob Ingebrigtsen level at 81.9. Éider Arévalo leads on Longevity. Jakob Ingebrigtsen leads on Dominance, Honours, Statistics.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Arévalo wins: Longevity
Ingebrigtsen wins: Dominance, Honours, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/eider-arevalo-vs-jakob-ingebrigtsen
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Arévalo leads in 2 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇨🇴 Arévalo | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 33 |
| 🇳🇴 Ingebrigtsen | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 7 | 17 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | ArévaloActive | IngebrigtsenActive |
|---|---|---|
| World titles | 1 | — |
| Pan American medals | 2 | — |
| 20 km walk personal best | 4,736 | — |
| Olympic appearances | 3 | — |
| South American titles | 2 | — |
| Olympic golds | — | 2 |
| World Championship golds | — | 2 |
| European golds | — | 8 |
| World records | — | 3 |
| 1500m best (sec) | — | 205.63 |
| Dominance w25% | 76 | 86 |
| Peak w20% | 92 | 92 |
| Longevity w20% | 78 | 60 |
| Honours w20% | 80 | 84 |
| Statistics w15% | 86 | 88 |
Éider Arévalo leads with a GOAT score of 81.9 against 81.9 for Jakob Ingebrigtsen — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Ingebrigtsen scores higher on dominance, honours, statistics. Arévalo leads on longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Arévalo: 81.9, Ingebrigtsen: 81.9.
Make your case for Arévalo vs Ingebrigtsen. 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.