Who is better, Howe or Zibanejad?
Gordie Howe leads with a GOAT score of 94.2 against 13.5 for Mika Zibanejad — a gap of 80.7 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
AthletesTeams
Howe vs Zibanejad
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
GOAT verdictgoatrank.world
HoweWinner
94.2Howe wins: Dominance, Peak, Longevity, Honours, Statistics
Zibanejad
13.5Zibanejad wins: no category outright
Candidates
Locked to Ice HockeyShareable URL · /compare/gordie-howe-vs-ros-mika-zibanejad
Time range
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Category radar
Verdict
Weighted GOAT score
🇨🇦 Gordie Howe
94.2
Howe leads in 5 of 5 weighted categories.
Zibanejad — Insufficient verified career data to calculate a reliable GOAT Score.
1. Gordie Howe
2. Mika Zibanejad
Category breakdown
Season form · Points per season
Career timeline · Points per season
Cumulative output season by season — the shape of each career against the other.
GOAT pace tracker
Career stage · GOAT pace
Through season 5 · Points per season1. 🇨🇦 Gordie Howe5 seasons played · career day 3,286427 points
Setting the pace at this stage
2. 🏳️ Mika Zibanejad5 seasons played · career day 1,825151 points
-64.6% vs Howe at the same stage
| Ghost race · career day | 30 | 100 | 365 | 1000 | 1825 | 3650 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇨🇦 Howe | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 86 | 427 |
| 🏳️ Zibanejad | 0 | 0 | 1 | 21 | 151 | 384 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
Fan vote — data vs the people
GOAT Rank · the data
Howe94.2
Zibanejad13.5
FAQ
Where does Zibanejad beat Howe?
Zibanejad does not lead any of the five categories; Howe is ahead or level on all of them.
How is the Howe vs Zibanejad score calculated?
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Howe: 94.2, Zibanejad: 13.5.
What do you think?
0 commentsMake your case for Howe vs Zibanejad. 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.