Who is better, Ferrero or Baddeley?
Juan Carlos Ferrero leads with a GOAT score of 82.8 against 82.8 for Wilfred Baddeley — 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 Juan Carlos Ferrero and Wilfred Baddeley level at 82.8. Juan Carlos Ferrero leads on Longevity, Statistics. Wilfred Baddeley leads on Dominance, Honours.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Ferrero wins: Longevity, Statistics
Baddeley wins: Dominance, Honours
Shareable URL · /compare/juan-carlos-ferrero-vs-wilfred-baddeley
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Ferrero 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇪🇸 Ferrero | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 9 | 15 |
| 🏴 Baddeley | 0 | 0 | 45 | 141 | 373 | 521 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | FerreroRetired | BaddeleyRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Grand Slam singles titles | 1 | — |
| ATP titles | 16 | — |
| Weeks at No. 1 | 8 | — |
| Davis Cup titles | 2 | — |
| Masters titles | 2 | — |
| Wimbledon singles titles | — | 3 |
| Wimbledon doubles titles | — | 4 |
| Wimbledon finals | — | 6 |
| Age at first title | — | 19 |
| Seasons in competition | — | 8 |
| Dominance w25% | 78 | 84 |
| Peak w20% | 92 | 92 |
| Longevity w20% | 78 | 70 |
| Honours w20% | 82 | 84 |
| Statistics w15% | 86 | 84 |
Juan Carlos Ferrero leads with a GOAT score of 82.8 against 82.8 for Wilfred Baddeley — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Baddeley scores higher on dominance, honours. Ferrero leads on statistics, longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Ferrero: 82.8, Baddeley: 82.8.
Make your case for Ferrero vs Baddeley. 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.