Who is better, Couples or Woods?
Tiger Woods leads with a GOAT score of 94.4 against 84.8 for Fred Couples — a gap of 9.6 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Tiger Woods above Fred Couples: 94.4 vs 84.8. Tiger Woods leads on Dominance, Honours, Peak. Fred Couples leads on Longevity.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Woods wins: Dominance, Peak, Honours, Statistics
Couples wins: Longevity
Shareable URL · /compare/fred-couples-vs-tiger-woods
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Woods leads in 4 of 5 weighted categories.
Couples — Insufficient verified career data to calculate a reliable GOAT Score.
Cumulative output season by season — the shape of each career against the other.
Setting the pace at age 21
No verified birth date for Couples — shown in the pro-debut view instead.
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 | CouplesActive | WoodsActive |
|---|---|---|
| Major titles | 1 | — |
| PGA Tour wins | 15 | 82 |
| Players Championships | 2 | — |
| Weeks at world number one | 16 | — |
| Ryder Cup appearances | 5 | — |
| Major championships | — | 15 |
| Weeks at world No. 1 | — | 683 |
| Player of the Year awards | — | 11 |
| Career prize money (M$) | — | 120.9 |
| Cuts made streak | — | 142 |
| Dominance w25% | 78 | 99 |
| Peak w20% | 90 | 100 |
| Longevity w20% | 90 | 82 |
| Honours w20% | 82 | 94 |
| Statistics w15% | 86 | 96 |
Tiger Woods leads with a GOAT score of 94.4 against 84.8 for Fred Couples — a gap of 9.6 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Couples scores higher on longevity. Woods leads on peak, dominance, honours, statistics.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Couples: 84.8, Woods: 94.4.
Make your case for Couples vs Woods. 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.