Who is better, faveN or Stewie2K?
Josef "faveN" Baumann leads with a GOAT score of 78.9 against 78.6 for Stewie2K — a gap of 0.3 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Josef "faveN" Baumann above Stewie2K: 78.9 vs 78.6. Josef "faveN" Baumann leads on Statistics, Longevity. Stewie2K leads on Honours, Dominance, Peak.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →faveN wins: Longevity, Statistics
Stewie2K wins: Dominance, Peak, Honours
Shareable URL · /compare/es-faven-vs-stewie2k
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
faveN 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇩🇪 faveN | 0 | 0 | 50 | 108 | 248 | 676 |
| 🇺🇸 Stewie2K | 0 | 0 | 58 | 132 | 394 | 588 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 split year periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | faveNActive | Stewie2KRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Big tournament titles | 4 | — |
| Major appearances | 6 | — |
| Seasons played | 10 | — |
| Career maps played | 1,500 | — |
| Tournament finals | 7 | — |
| Majors won | — | 1 |
| Intel Grand Slam titles | — | 1 |
| HLTV top-20 appearances | — | 3 |
| Big event titles | — | 10 |
| Major finals reached | — | 1 |
| Dominance w25% | 74 | 76 |
| Peak w20% | 86 | 88 |
| Longevity w20% | 78 | 72 |
| Honours w20% | 72 | 78 |
| Statistics w15% | 88 | 80 |
Josef "faveN" Baumann leads with a GOAT score of 78.9 against 78.6 for Stewie2K — a gap of 0.3 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Stewie2K scores higher on peak, dominance, honours. faveN leads on statistics, longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. faveN: 78.9, Stewie2K: 78.6.
Make your case for faveN vs Stewie2K. 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.