Who is better, Orantes or Kvitová?
Manuel Orantes leads with a GOAT score of 78.6 against 78.6 for Petra Kvitová — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
AthletesTeams
Orantes vs Kvitová
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently scores Manuel Orantes and Petra Kvitová level at 78.6. Manuel Orantes leads on Peak. Petra Kvitová leads on Longevity, Honours.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →GOAT verdictgoatrank.world
OrantesWinner
78.6Orantes wins: Peak
Kvitová
78.6Kvitová wins: Longevity, Honours
Candidates
Locked to TennisShareable URL · /compare/manuel-orantes-vs-petra-kvitova
Time range
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Category radar
Verdict
Weighted GOAT score
🇪🇸 Manuel Orantes
78.6
Orantes leads in 3 of 5 weighted categories.
1. Manuel Orantes
2. Petra Kvitová
Category breakdown
Season form · Form index per season
Career timeline · Form index per season
Cumulative output season by season — the shape of each career against the other.
GOAT pace tracker
Career stage · GOAT pace
Through season 5 · Form index per season1. 🇪🇸 Manuel Orantes5 seasons played · career day 1,825323 titles
Setting the pace at this stage
2. 🇨🇿 Petra Kvitová5 seasons played · career day 2,55611 titles
-96.6% vs Orantes at the same stage
| Ghost race · career day | 30 | 100 | 365 | 1000 | 1825 | 3650 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇪🇸 Orantes | 0 | 0 | 50 | 107 | 323 | 671 |
| 🇨🇿 Kvitová | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 17 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
Fan vote — data vs the people
GOAT Rank · the data
Orantes78.6
Kvitová78.6
FAQ
Where does Kvitová beat Orantes?
Kvitová scores higher on honours, longevity. Orantes leads on peak.
How is the Orantes vs Kvitová score calculated?
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Orantes: 78.6, Kvitová: 78.6.
What do you think?
0 commentsMake your case for Orantes vs Kvitová. 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.