Who is better, Faker or NiKo?
Lee "Faker" Sang-hyeok leads with a GOAT score of 97.5 against 86.4 for Nikola "NiKo" Kovač — a gap of 11.1 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 Nikola "NiKo" Kovač: 97.5 vs 86.4. Lee "Faker" Sang-hyeok leads on Honours, Dominance, Longevity. Nikola "NiKo" Kovač leads on Statistics.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Faker wins: Dominance, Peak, Longevity, Honours
NiKo wins: Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/faker-vs-niko
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Faker leads in 4 of 5 weighted categories.
Cumulative output season by season — the shape of each career against the other.
Setting the pace at age 21
NiKo is -42.9% 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) | NiKoActive · FaZe Clan |
|---|---|---|
| World Championships | 5 | — |
| MSI titles | 2 | — |
| Domestic league titles | 10 | — |
| Career KDA | 5.1 | — |
| Pro seasons | 12 | — |
| Career prize money (M$) | 1.6 | 1.6 |
| Major titles | — | 0 |
| HLTV top-20 appearances | — | 9 |
| Big event finals | — | 22 |
| Career rating 2.0 | — | 1.17 |
| Big event MVPs | — | 10 |
| Dominance w25% | 98 | 86 |
| Peak w20% | 97 | 92 |
| Longevity w20% | 99 | 88 |
| Honours w20% | 99 | 74 |
| Statistics w15% | 93 | 94 |
Lee "Faker" Sang-hyeok leads with a GOAT score of 97.5 against 86.4 for Nikola "NiKo" Kovač — a gap of 11.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
NiKo scores higher on statistics. Faker leads on peak, dominance, honours, longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Faker: 97.5, NiKo: 86.4.
Make your case for Faker vs NiKo. 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.