Who is better, Walkenhorst or Carrillo?
Kira Walkenhorst leads with a GOAT score of 81.9 against 81.9 for Nancy Carrillo — 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 Kira Walkenhorst and Nancy Carrillo level at 81.9. Kira Walkenhorst leads on Peak, Honours, Dominance. Nancy Carrillo leads on Longevity, Statistics.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Walkenhorst wins: Dominance, Peak, Honours
Carrillo wins: Longevity, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/kira-walkenhorst-vs-nancy-carrillo
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Walkenhorst 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇩🇪 Walkenhorst | 0 | 0 | 50 | 108 | 328 | 688 |
| 🇨🇺 Carrillo | 0 | 0 | 50 | 105 | 230 | 635 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | WalkenhorstRetired | CarrilloRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Olympic gold medals | 1 | — |
| World Championship titles | 1 | — |
| European titles | 2 | — |
| World Tour wins | 7 | — |
| Years at the top level | 13 | — |
| Pan American medals | — | 2 |
| NORCECA titles | — | 3 |
| Olympic appearances | — | 2 |
| World Championship appearances | — | 3 |
| National team years | — | 15 |
| Dominance w25% | 80 | 76 |
| Peak w20% | 94 | 86 |
| Longevity w20% | 70 | 86 |
| Honours w20% | 84 | 78 |
| Statistics w15% | 82 | 86 |
Kira Walkenhorst leads with a GOAT score of 81.9 against 81.9 for Nancy Carrillo — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Carrillo scores higher on statistics, longevity. Walkenhorst leads on peak, dominance, honours.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Walkenhorst: 81.9, Carrillo: 81.9.
Make your case for Walkenhorst vs Carrillo. 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.