Who is better, Snappi or N0tail?
Marco "Snappi" Pfeiffer leads with a GOAT score of 82.4 against 82.4 for Johan "N0tail" Sundstein — 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 Marco "Snappi" Pfeiffer and Johan "N0tail" Sundstein level at 82.4. Marco "Snappi" Pfeiffer leads on Longevity, Statistics. Johan "N0tail" Sundstein leads on Honours, Dominance.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Snappi wins: Longevity, Statistics
N0tail wins: Dominance, Honours
Shareable URL · /compare/es-snappi-vs-n0tail
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Snappi 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇩🇰 Snappi | 0 | 0 | 50 | 107 | 322 | 677 |
| 🇩🇰 N0tail | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 35 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 split year periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | SnappiActive | N0tailRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Major finals | 1 | — |
| Big tournament titles | 4 | — |
| Seasons played | 13 | — |
| Teams captained | 4 | — |
| Career maps played | 2,000 | — |
| The International titles | — | 2 |
| Major titles | — | 4 |
| Career prize money (USD) | — | 7,100,000 |
| Premier tournament wins | — | 12 |
| TI finals | — | 2 |
| Years at tier-1 level | — | 11 |
| Dominance w25% | 76 | 80 |
| Peak w20% | 88 | 88 |
| Longevity w20% | 88 | 80 |
| Honours w20% | 78 | 84 |
| Statistics w15% | 84 | 80 |
Marco "Snappi" Pfeiffer leads with a GOAT score of 82.4 against 82.4 for Johan "N0tail" Sundstein — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
N0tail scores higher on dominance, honours. Snappi leads on statistics, longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Snappi: 82.4, N0tail: 82.4.
Make your case for Snappi vs N0tail. 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.