Who is better, Hagi or Năstase?
Gheorghe Hagi leads with a cross-sport score of 86.1 against 82.3 for Ilie Năstase — a gap of 3.8 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Gheorghe Hagi above Ilie Năstase: 86.1 vs 82.3. Ilie Năstase leads on Dominance, Statistics, Peak.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Hagi wins: no category outright
Năstase wins: Dominance, Peak, Honours, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/gheorghe-hagi-vs-ilie-nastase
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
86.1 in-sport × 1.00 Global participation & competition depth
Hagi leads in 1 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇷🇴 Hagi | 0 | 0 | 50 | 104 | 293 | 604 |
| 🇷🇴 Năstase | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 47 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | HagiRetired | NăstaseRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Dominance w25% | 82 | 86 |
| Peak w20% | 92 | 94 |
| Longevity w20% | 86 | 86 |
| Honours w20% | 84 | 86 |
| Statistics w15% | 88 | 92 |
| UEFA Cup titles | 1 | — |
| UEFA Super Cup titles | 1 | — |
| Romanian league titles | 4 | — |
| Romania caps | 124 | — |
| Romania goals | 35 | — |
| Grand Slam singles titles | — | 2 |
| Career singles titles | — | 64 |
| Weeks at No. 1 | — | 40 |
| Year-end Masters titles | — | 4 |
| Grand Slam doubles titles | — | 3 |
Gheorghe Hagi leads with a cross-sport score of 86.1 against 82.3 for Ilie Năstase — a gap of 3.8 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Năstase scores higher on peak, dominance, honours, statistics. Hagi leads on no category.
Each in-sport GOAT score is multiplied by Competition Depth: Hagi 1.00 (football) and Năstase 0.93 (tennis). Deeper, more global sports keep more of their score.
Make your case for Hagi vs Năstase. 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.