Who is better, Antropova or Tom?
Ekaterina Antropova leads with a GOAT score of 86.0 against 85.9 for Logan Tom — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Ekaterina Antropova above Logan Tom: 86.0 vs 85.9. Ekaterina Antropova leads on Honours, Statistics, Peak. Logan Tom leads on Longevity.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Antropova wins: Dominance, Peak, Honours, Statistics
Tom wins: Longevity
Shareable URL · /compare/ekaterina-antropova-vs-logan-tom
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Antropova leads in 4 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇮🇹 Antropova | 0 | 0 | 58 | 124 | 366 | 738 |
| 🇺🇸 Tom | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 6 | 19 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | AntropovaActive | TomRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Olympic gold medals | 1 | — |
| World Championship gold medals | 1 | — |
| Nations League titles | 1 | — |
| Italian league titles | 2 | — |
| CEV Champions League titles | 1 | — |
| Olympic silver medals | — | 2 |
| Olympic Games contested | — | 4 |
| World Championship medals | — | 1 |
| Grand Prix medals | — | 5 |
| World Cup medals | — | 1 |
| Dominance w25% | 86 | 84 |
| Peak w20% | 93 | 90 |
| Longevity w20% | 72 | 86 |
| Honours w20% | 90 | 84 |
| Statistics w15% | 90 | 86 |
Ekaterina Antropova leads with a GOAT score of 86.0 against 85.9 for Logan Tom — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Tom scores higher on longevity. Antropova leads on peak, dominance, honours, statistics.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Antropova: 86.0, Tom: 85.9.
Make your case for Antropova vs Tom. 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.