Who is better, Matthäus or Shilton?
Lothar Matthäus leads with a GOAT score of 88.4 against 88.4 for Peter Shilton — 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 Lothar Matthäus and Peter Shilton level at 88.4. Lothar Matthäus leads on Statistics, Honours. Peter Shilton leads on Longevity, Dominance.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Matthäus wins: Honours, Statistics
Shilton wins: Dominance, Longevity
Shareable URL · /compare/matthaus-vs-peter-shilton
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Matthäus 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇩🇪 Matthäus | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 27 | 77 |
| 🏴 Shilton | 0 | 0 | 0 | 58 | 278 | 622 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | MatthäusRetired | ShiltonRetired |
|---|---|---|
| World Cups | 1 | — |
| Ballon d'Or | 1 | — |
| FIFA World Player | 1 | — |
| Bundesliga titles | 7 | — |
| Germany caps | 150 | — |
| World Cup appearances | 25 | — |
| England caps | — | 125 |
| European Cups | — | 2 |
| League titles | — | 1 |
| League appearances | — | 1,005 |
| World Cup tournaments | — | 3 |
| Dominance w25% | 86 | 88 |
| Peak w20% | 90 | 90 |
| Longevity w20% | 92 | 96 |
| Honours w20% | 88 | 86 |
| Statistics w15% | 86 | 80 |
Lothar Matthäus leads with a GOAT score of 88.4 against 88.4 for Peter Shilton — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shilton scores higher on dominance, longevity. Matthäus leads on honours, statistics.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Matthäus: 88.4, Shilton: 88.4.
Make your case for Matthäus vs Shilton. 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.