Who is better, Fabi or Buldakova?
Lyudmila Buldakova leads with a GOAT score of 89.6 against 89.4 for Fabiana Oliveira — 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 Lyudmila Buldakova above Fabiana Oliveira: 89.6 vs 89.4. Lyudmila Buldakova leads on Dominance, Peak, Honours. Fabiana Oliveira leads on Longevity, Statistics.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Buldakova wins: Dominance, Peak, Honours
Fabi wins: Longevity, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/fabiana-oliveira-vs-lyudmila-buldakova
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Buldakova 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇧🇷 Fabi | 0 | 0 | 55 | 114 | 246 | 655 |
| 🇷🇺 Buldakova | 0 | 0 | 60 | 126 | 276 | 717 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | FabiRetired | BuldakovaRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Olympic gold medals | 2 | 2 |
| World Grand Prix titles | 8 | — |
| World Championship medals | 2 | — |
| Best libero awards | 5 | — |
| Olympic appearances | 3 | — |
| Olympic medals | — | 3 |
| World Championship gold medals | — | 2 |
| European titles | — | 4 |
| Soviet league titles | — | 6 |
| Dominance w25% | 86 | 88 |
| Peak w20% | 92 | 94 |
| Longevity w20% | 88 | 84 |
| Honours w20% | 92 | 94 |
| Statistics w15% | 90 | 88 |
Lyudmila Buldakova leads with a GOAT score of 89.6 against 89.4 for Fabiana Oliveira — a gap of 0.2 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Fabi scores higher on statistics, longevity. Buldakova leads on peak, dominance, honours.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Fabi: 89.4, Buldakova: 89.6.
Make your case for Fabi vs Buldakova. 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.