Who is better, Ostapenko or Stich?
Jeļena Ostapenko leads with a GOAT score of 79.1 against 79.1 for Michael Stich — 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 Jeļena Ostapenko and Michael Stich level at 79.1. Jeļena Ostapenko leads on Longevity, Statistics. Michael Stich leads on Honours, Dominance.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Ostapenko wins: Longevity, Statistics
Stich wins: Dominance, Honours
Shareable URL · /compare/jelena-ostapenko-vs-michael-stich
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Ostapenko 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇱🇻 Ostapenko | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 12 |
| 🇩🇪 Stich | 0 | 0 | 55 | 124 | 302 | 642 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | OstapenkoActive | StichRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Grand Slam singles titles | 1 | — |
| WTA titles | 9 | — |
| Grand Slam doubles titles | 1 | — |
| Career-high ranking | 5 | — |
| Career match wins | 400 | — |
| Major singles titles | — | 1 |
| Major finals | — | 3 |
| Olympic gold medals | — | 1 |
| Career singles titles | — | 18 |
| Career-high world ranking | — | 2 |
| Dominance w25% | 74 | 78 |
| Peak w20% | 90 | 90 |
| Longevity w20% | 76 | 68 |
| Honours w20% | 74 | 80 |
| Statistics w15% | 84 | 80 |
Jeļena Ostapenko leads with a GOAT score of 79.1 against 79.1 for Michael Stich — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Stich scores higher on dominance, honours. Ostapenko leads on statistics, longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Ostapenko: 79.1, Stich: 79.1.
Make your case for Ostapenko vs Stich. 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.