Who is better, Lebesson or Li Xiaoxia?
Li Xiaoxia leads with a GOAT score of 78.3 against 78.2 for Emmanuel Lebesson — 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 Li Xiaoxia above Emmanuel Lebesson: 78.3 vs 78.2. Li Xiaoxia leads on Dominance, Honours, Statistics. Emmanuel Lebesson leads on Longevity, Peak.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Li Xiaoxia wins: Dominance, Honours, Statistics
Lebesson wins: Peak, Longevity
Shareable URL · /compare/emmanuel-lebesson-vs-li-xiaoxia
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Li Xiaoxia 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇫🇷 Lebesson | 0 | 0 | 48 | 102 | 300 | 636 |
| 🇨🇳 Li Xiaoxia | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | LebessonActive | Li XiaoxiaRetired |
|---|---|---|
| European titles | 1 | — |
| Olympic medals | 1 | — |
| French national titles | 3 | — |
| European team medals | 3 | — |
| Years at the top level | 19 | — |
| Olympic golds | — | 2 |
| World Championship singles titles | — | 2 |
| World Cup titles | — | 1 |
| Grand Slams completed | — | 1 |
| World team titles | — | 4 |
| Months at No. 1 | — | 12 |
| Dominance w25% | 72 | 76 |
| Peak w20% | 86 | 84 |
| Longevity w20% | 80 | 74 |
| Honours w20% | 78 | 80 |
| Statistics w15% | 76 | 78 |
Li Xiaoxia leads with a GOAT score of 78.3 against 78.2 for Emmanuel Lebesson — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Lebesson scores higher on peak, longevity. Li Xiaoxia leads on dominance, honours, statistics.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Lebesson: 78.2, Li Xiaoxia: 78.3.
Make your case for Lebesson vs Li Xiaoxia. 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.