Who is better, Poulter or Brunner?
Jordyn Poulter leads with a GOAT score of 78.3 against 78.3 for Theo Brunner — 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 Jordyn Poulter and Theo Brunner level at 78.3. Jordyn Poulter leads on Honours, Dominance, Peak. Theo Brunner leads on Longevity, Statistics.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Poulter wins: Dominance, Peak, Honours
Brunner wins: Longevity, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/jordyn-poulter-vs-theo-brunner-bv
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Poulter 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇺🇸 Poulter | 0 | 0 | 58 | 130 | 398 | 650 |
| 🇺🇸 Brunner | 0 | 0 | 52 | 109 | 311 | 641 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | PoulterActive | BrunnerRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Olympic gold medals | 1 | — |
| Nations League titles | 2 | — |
| Best setter awards | 2 | — |
| Olympic medals | 2 | — |
| Years with the national team | 7 | — |
| AVP titles | — | 4 |
| FIVB World Tour medals | — | 3 |
| AVP Best Blocker awards | — | 1 |
| World Championship appearances | — | 3 |
| Seasons on tour | — | 13 |
| Dominance w25% | 76 | 72 |
| Peak w20% | 86 | 84 |
| Longevity w20% | 72 | 82 |
| Honours w20% | 80 | 74 |
| Statistics w15% | 78 | 82 |
Jordyn Poulter leads with a GOAT score of 78.3 against 78.3 for Theo Brunner — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Brunner scores higher on statistics, longevity. Poulter leads on peak, dominance, honours.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Poulter: 78.3, Brunner: 78.3.
Make your case for Poulter vs Brunner. 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.