Who is better, Charles or Chávez?
Ezzard Charles leads with a GOAT score of 89.8 against 89.8 for Julio César Chávez — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
AthletesTeams
Charles vs Chávez
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently scores Ezzard Charles and Julio César Chávez level at 89.8. Ezzard Charles leads on Peak. Julio César Chávez leads on Longevity.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →GOAT verdictgoatrank.world
CharlesWinner
89.8Charles wins: Peak
Chávez
89.8Chávez wins: Longevity
Candidates
Locked to BoxingShareable URL · /compare/ezzard-charles-vs-julio-cesar-chavez
Time range
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Category radar
Verdict
Weighted GOAT score
🇺🇸 Ezzard Charles
89.8
Charles leads in 4 of 5 weighted categories.
1. Ezzard Charles
2. Julio César Chávez
Category breakdown
Season form · Form index per season
Career timeline · Form index per season
Cumulative output season by season — the shape of each career against the other.
GOAT pace tracker
Career stage · GOAT pace
Through year 5 · Form index per season1. 🇺🇸 Ezzard Charles5 years played · career day 1,826257 title wins
Setting the pace at this stage
2. 🇲🇽 Julio César Chávez5 years played · career day 2,55633 title wins
-87.2% vs Charles at the same stage
| Ghost race · career day | 30 | 100 | 365 | 1000 | 1825 | 3650 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇺🇸 Charles | 0 | 0 | 40 | 86 | 194 | 566 |
| 🇲🇽 Chávez | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 16 | 41 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 year periods are measured against the same career window.
Fan vote — data vs the people
GOAT Rank · the data
Charles89.8
Chávez89.8
FAQ
Where does Chávez beat Charles?
Chávez scores higher on longevity. Charles leads on peak.
How is the Charles vs Chávez score calculated?
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Charles: 89.8, Chávez: 89.8.
What do you think?
0 commentsMake your case for Charles vs Chávez. 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.