Who is better, GuardiaN or Pawn?
GuardiaN leads with a GOAT score of 81.4 against 81.4 for Heo "Pawn" Won-seok — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently scores GuardiaN and Heo "Pawn" Won-seok level at 81.4. GuardiaN leads on Dominance, Longevity, Statistics. Heo "Pawn" Won-seok leads on Honours, Peak.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →GuardiaN wins: Dominance, Longevity, Statistics
Pawn wins: Peak, Honours
Shareable URL · /compare/guardian-vs-pawn-lol
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
GuardiaN 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇸🇰 GuardiaN | 0 | 0 | 56 | 126 | 300 | 672 |
| 🇰🇷 Pawn | 0 | 0 | 60 | 156 | 402 | 590 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 split year periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | GuardiaNRetired | PawnRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Majors won | 1 | — |
| HLTV top-20 appearances | 4 | — |
| Big event titles | 12 | — |
| Major finals reached | 3 | — |
| Big event MVP awards | 3 | — |
| World Championship titles | — | 1 |
| LPL titles | — | 2 |
| Mid-Season Invitational finals | — | 1 |
| World Championship appearances | — | 4 |
| Professional seasons | — | 8 |
| Dominance w25% | 80 | 78 |
| Peak w20% | 90 | 92 |
| Longevity w20% | 76 | 74 |
| Honours w20% | 78 | 82 |
| Statistics w15% | 84 | 82 |
GuardiaN leads with a GOAT score of 81.4 against 81.4 for Heo "Pawn" Won-seok — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Pawn scores higher on peak, honours. GuardiaN leads on dominance, statistics, longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. GuardiaN: 81.4, Pawn: 81.4.
Make your case for GuardiaN vs Pawn. 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.