Who is better, Feng or Liu Shiwen?
Liu Shiwen leads with a GOAT score of 75.5 against 74.9 for Feng Mengya — a gap of 0.6 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Liu Shiwen above Feng Mengya: 75.5 vs 74.9. Liu Shiwen leads on Honours, Dominance. Feng Mengya leads on Statistics, Peak.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Liu Shiwen wins: Dominance, Honours
Feng wins: Peak, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/feng-mengya-vs-liu-shiwen
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Liu Shiwen 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇨🇳 Feng | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 150 | 264 |
| 🇨🇳 Liu Shiwen | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 31 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | FengActive | Liu ShiwenRetired |
|---|---|---|
| World Tour titles | 2 | — |
| Asian Championship medals | 1 | — |
| Chinese Super League seasons | 10 | — |
| Career highest world ranking | 12 | — |
| National team call-ups | 15 | — |
| World Cup singles titles | — | 5 |
| World Championship singles titles | — | 1 |
| Olympic golds | — | 1 |
| World team titles | — | 5 |
| Months at No. 1 | — | 38 |
| ITTF Tour titles | — | 24 |
| Dominance w25% | 68 | 72 |
| Peak w20% | 84 | 80 |
| Longevity w20% | 74 | 74 |
| Honours w20% | 70 | 78 |
| Statistics w15% | 82 | 74 |
Liu Shiwen leads with a GOAT score of 75.5 against 74.9 for Feng Mengya — a gap of 0.6 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Feng scores higher on peak, statistics. Liu Shiwen leads on dominance, honours.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Feng: 74.9, Liu Shiwen: 75.5.
Make your case for Feng vs Liu Shiwen. 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.