Who is better, Liu Shiwen or Wang?
Wang Chen leads with a GOAT score of 76.0 against 75.5 for Liu Shiwen — a gap of 0.5 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Wang Chen above Liu Shiwen: 76.0 vs 75.5. Wang Chen leads on Longevity, Statistics. Liu Shiwen leads on Honours, Dominance.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Wang wins: Longevity, Statistics
Liu Shiwen wins: Dominance, Honours
Shareable URL · /compare/liu-shiwen-vs-wang-chen-tt
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Wang 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇨🇳 Liu Shiwen | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 31 |
| 🇺🇸 Wang | 0 | 0 | 44 | 92 | 260 | 540 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | Liu ShiwenRetired | WangRetired |
|---|---|---|
| World Cup singles titles | 5 | — |
| World Championship singles titles | 1 | — |
| Olympic golds | 1 | — |
| World team titles | 5 | — |
| Months at No. 1 | 38 | — |
| ITTF Tour titles | 24 | — |
| Pan American Games golds | — | 2 |
| Olympic appearances | — | 2 |
| US national titles | — | 4 |
| Career world ranking best | — | 22 |
| North American titles | — | 3 |
| Dominance w25% | 72 | 70 |
| Peak w20% | 80 | 80 |
| Longevity w20% | 74 | 80 |
| Honours w20% | 78 | 74 |
| Statistics w15% | 74 | 78 |
Wang Chen leads with a GOAT score of 76.0 against 75.5 for Liu Shiwen — a gap of 0.5 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Liu Shiwen scores higher on dominance, honours. Wang leads on statistics, longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Liu Shiwen: 75.5, Wang: 76.0.
Make your case for Liu Shiwen vs Wang. 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.