Who is better, Ame or Diamondprox?
Danil "Diamondprox" Reshetnikov leads with a GOAT score of 87.5 against 87.3 for Wang "Ame" Chunyu — a gap of 0.2 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Danil "Diamondprox" Reshetnikov above Wang "Ame" Chunyu: 87.5 vs 87.3. Danil "Diamondprox" Reshetnikov leads on Peak, Longevity. Wang "Ame" Chunyu leads on Statistics.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Diamondprox wins: Peak, Longevity
Ame wins: Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/es-ame-vs-es-diamondprox
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Diamondprox 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇨🇳 Ame | 0 | 0 | 55 | 124 | 302 | 748 |
| 🇷🇺 Diamondprox | 0 | 0 | 60 | 139 | 408 | 662 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 split year periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | AmeActive | DiamondproxRetired |
|---|---|---|
| The International finals | 2 | — |
| Major titles | 3 | — |
| The International top-four finishes | 3 | — |
| Seasons played | 9 | 10 |
| Career prize money in millions | 3 | — |
| World Championship finals | — | 1 |
| International titles | — | 2 |
| Regional titles | — | 6 |
| All-star appearances | — | 2 |
| Dominance w25% | 86 | 86 |
| Peak w20% | 92 | 94 |
| Longevity w20% | 82 | 84 |
| Honours w20% | 86 | 86 |
| Statistics w15% | 92 | 88 |
Danil "Diamondprox" Reshetnikov leads with a GOAT score of 87.5 against 87.3 for Wang "Ame" Chunyu — a gap of 0.2 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Ame scores higher on statistics. Diamondprox leads on peak, longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Ame: 87.3, Diamondprox: 87.5.
Make your case for Ame vs Diamondprox. 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.