Who is better, Carlson or Abood?
Matthew Abood leads with a GOAT score of 70.9 against 70.3 for Kasey Carlson — a gap of 0.6 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Matthew Abood above Kasey Carlson: 70.9 vs 70.3. Matthew Abood leads on Longevity, Dominance. Kasey Carlson leads on Peak, Honours, Statistics.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Abood wins: Dominance, Longevity
Carlson wins: Peak, Honours, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/kasey-carlson-vs-matthew-abood
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Abood leads in 2 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇺🇸 Carlson | 0 | 0 | 0 | 68.4 | 269.4 | 405.9 |
| 🇦🇺 Abood | 0 | 0 | 22.6 | 45 | 111.3 | 199.35 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | CarlsonRetired | AboodRetired |
|---|---|---|
| World Championship golds | 1 | 1 |
| World Championship medals | 1 | — |
| US national titles | 1 | — |
| 100 m breaststroke best | 66.3 | — |
| NCAA All-America honours | 6 | — |
| Commonwealth Games medals | — | 2 |
| Olympic Games | — | 2 |
| 50 m freestyle best | — | 21.9 |
| National titles | — | 3 |
| Dominance w25% | 62 | 64 |
| Peak w20% | 80 | 78 |
| Longevity w20% | 64 | 70 |
| Honours w20% | 70 | 68 |
| Statistics w15% | 80 | 78 |
Matthew Abood leads with a GOAT score of 70.9 against 70.3 for Kasey Carlson — a gap of 0.6 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Carlson scores higher on peak, honours, statistics. Abood leads on dominance, longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Carlson: 70.3, Abood: 70.9.
Make your case for Carlson vs Abood. 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.