Who is better, Hagler or Jackson?
Peter Jackson leads with a GOAT score of 85.5 against 85.4 for Marvelous Marvin Hagler — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Peter Jackson above Marvelous Marvin Hagler: 85.5 vs 85.4. Peter Jackson leads on Peak, Dominance. Marvelous Marvin Hagler leads on Honours.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Jackson wins: Dominance, Peak
Hagler wins: Honours
Shareable URL · /compare/marvin-hagler-vs-peter-jackson-boxer
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Jackson leads in 4 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇺🇸 Hagler | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 27 | 41 |
| 🇦🇺 Jackson | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 25 | 51 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 year periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | HaglerRetired | JacksonRetired |
|---|---|---|
| World titles | 1 | — |
| Title defences | 12 | — |
| Career wins | 62 | — |
| Knockouts | 52 | — |
| Undisputed reigns | 1 | — |
| Ring Magazine Fighter of the Year | 2 | — |
| Professional wins | — | 45 |
| Knockout wins | — | 30 |
| Commonwealth titles | — | 1 |
| Draw with James J. Corbett rounds | — | 61 |
| Professional bouts | — | 66 |
| Dominance w25% | 84 | 86 |
| Peak w20% | 90 | 94 |
| Longevity w20% | 82 | 82 |
| Honours w20% | 84 | 78 |
| Statistics w15% | 88 | 88 |
Peter Jackson leads with a GOAT score of 85.5 against 85.4 for Marvelous Marvin Hagler — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Hagler scores higher on honours. Jackson leads on peak, dominance.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Hagler: 85.4, Jackson: 85.5.
Make your case for Hagler vs Jackson. 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.