Who is better, Faker or Flash?
Lee "Faker" Sang-hyeok leads with a GOAT score of 97.5 against 91.3 for Lee "Flash" Young-ho — a gap of 6.2 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Lee "Faker" Sang-hyeok above Lee "Flash" Young-ho: 97.5 vs 91.3. Lee "Faker" Sang-hyeok leads on Longevity, Honours, Dominance. Lee "Flash" Young-ho leads on Statistics, Peak.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Faker wins: Dominance, Longevity, Honours
Flash wins: Peak, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/faker-vs-flash
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Faker leads in 3 of 5 weighted categories.
Cumulative output season by season — the shape of each career against the other.
Setting the pace at age 21
Flash is -14.3% behind Faker's pace at age 21
Every career is cut at the season the athlete turned 21, so a rookie today is measured against exactly what a legend had banked by the same birthday.
| Metric | FakerActive · T1 (SK Telecom T1) | FlashRetired · KT / Afreeca era |
|---|---|---|
| World Championships | 5 | — |
| MSI titles | 2 | — |
| Domestic league titles | 10 | — |
| Career KDA | 5.1 | — |
| Pro seasons | 12 | 10 |
| Career prize money (M$) | 1.6 | 0.5 |
| Individual league titles | — | 7 |
| Career win rate | — | 73.6% |
| Premier finals | — | 12 |
| Team league titles | — | 6 |
| Dominance w25% | 98 | 97 |
| Peak w20% | 97 | 98 |
| Longevity w20% | 99 | 74 |
| Honours w20% | 99 | 92 |
| Statistics w15% | 93 | 95 |
Lee "Faker" Sang-hyeok leads with a GOAT score of 97.5 against 91.3 for Lee "Flash" Young-ho — a gap of 6.2 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Flash scores higher on peak, statistics. Faker leads on dominance, honours, longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Faker: 97.5, Flash: 91.3.
Make your case for Faker vs Flash. 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.