Who is better, Van Almsick or Hveger?
Ragnhild Hveger leads with a GOAT score of 88.2 against 88.0 for Franziska van Almsick — 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 Ragnhild Hveger above Franziska van Almsick: 88.2 vs 88.0. Ragnhild Hveger leads on Dominance, Statistics. Franziska van Almsick leads on Honours, Longevity.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Hveger wins: Dominance, Statistics
Van Almsick wins: Longevity, Honours
Shareable URL · /compare/franziska-van-almsick-vs-ragnhild-hveger
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Hveger 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇩🇪 Van Almsick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 119.9 | 478.7 | 960.1 |
| 🇩🇰 Hveger | 0 | 0 | 70 | 158 | 351 | 666 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | Van AlmsickRetired | HvegerRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Olympic medals | 10 | — |
| World Championship golds | 3 | — |
| European titles | 18 | — |
| 200 m freestyle world records | 2 | — |
| 200 m freestyle best | 118 | — |
| World records | — | 42 |
| Olympic silver medals | — | 1 |
| European Championship golds | — | 5 |
| Olympic Games contested | — | 2 |
| Danish national titles | — | 40 |
| Dominance w25% | 84 | 92 |
| Peak w20% | 94 | 94 |
| Longevity w20% | 84 | 80 |
| Honours w20% | 88 | 82 |
| Statistics w15% | 92 | 93 |
Ragnhild Hveger leads with a GOAT score of 88.2 against 88.0 for Franziska van Almsick — a gap of 0.2 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Van Almsick scores higher on honours, longevity. Hveger leads on dominance, statistics.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Van Almsick: 88.0, Hveger: 88.2.
Make your case for Van Almsick vs Hveger. 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.