Who is better, Faulkner or Campbell?
Michael Campbell leads with a GOAT score of 79.1 against 79.0 for Max Faulkner — 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 Michael Campbell above Max Faulkner: 79.1 vs 79.0. Michael Campbell leads on Dominance, Honours, Statistics. Max Faulkner leads on Longevity.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Campbell wins: Dominance, Honours, Statistics
Faulkner wins: Longevity
Shareable URL · /compare/max-faulkner-vs-michael-campbell
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Campbell 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇬🇧 Faulkner | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 9 | 15 |
| 🇳🇿 Campbell | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 6 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | FaulknerRetired | CampbellRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Open Championship titles | 1 | — |
| Ryder Cup appearances | 5 | — |
| Professional wins | 16 | — |
| Spanish Open titles | 2 | — |
| Career span in years | 35 | — |
| Major titles | — | 1 |
| European Tour wins | — | 8 |
| World Match Play titles | — | 1 |
| Career-high world ranking | — | 12 |
| Presidents Cup appearances | — | 1 |
| Dominance w25% | 68 | 72 |
| Peak w20% | 90 | 90 |
| Longevity w20% | 88 | 78 |
| Honours w20% | 72 | 76 |
| Statistics w15% | 80 | 82 |
Michael Campbell leads with a GOAT score of 79.1 against 79.0 for Max Faulkner — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Faulkner scores higher on longevity. Campbell leads on dominance, honours, statistics.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Faulkner: 79.0, Campbell: 79.1.
Make your case for Faulkner vs Campbell. 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.