Who is better, Henricks or Berkoff?
Jon Henricks leads with a GOAT score of 79.2 against 79.1 for Katharine Berkoff — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Jon Henricks above Katharine Berkoff: 79.2 vs 79.1. Jon Henricks leads on Dominance, Peak. Katharine Berkoff leads on Statistics, Longevity.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Henricks wins: Dominance, Peak
Berkoff wins: Longevity, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/jon-henricks-vs-katharine-berkoff
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Henricks 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇦🇺 Henricks | 0 | 0 | 66 | 146 | 420 | 556 |
| 🇺🇸 Berkoff | 0 | 0 | 27.9 | 55.6 | 137.7 | 192.12 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | HenricksRetired | BerkoffActive |
|---|---|---|
| Olympic gold medals | 2 | — |
| World records | 6 | — |
| Commonwealth Games golds | 3 | — |
| Australian titles | 8 | — |
| Olympic Games contested | 2 | — |
| World Championship golds | — | 3 |
| Olympic medals | — | 2 |
| NCAA titles | — | 5 |
| 50 m backstroke best | — | 27.12 |
| Olympic Games | — | 1 |
| Dominance w25% | 80 | 76 |
| Peak w20% | 92 | 88 |
| Longevity w20% | 62 | 66 |
| Honours w20% | 82 | 82 |
| Statistics w15% | 80 | 86 |
Jon Henricks leads with a GOAT score of 79.2 against 79.1 for Katharine Berkoff — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Berkoff scores higher on statistics, longevity. Henricks leads on peak, dominance.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Henricks: 79.2, Berkoff: 79.1.
Make your case for Henricks vs Berkoff. 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.