Who is better, Lanning or Ponting?
Meg Lanning leads with a GOAT score of 88.7 against 88.7 for Ricky Ponting — 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 Meg Lanning and Ricky Ponting level at 88.7. Meg Lanning leads on Honours, Peak, Dominance. Ricky Ponting leads on Longevity, Statistics.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Lanning wins: Dominance, Peak, Honours
Ponting wins: Longevity, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/meg-lanning-vs-ricky-ponting
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Lanning 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇦🇺 Lanning | 0 | 0 | 0 | 45 | 217 | 472 |
| 🇦🇺 Ponting | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 240 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 year periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | LanningRetired | PontingRetired |
|---|---|---|
| World Cup titles | 7 | — |
| ODI centuries | 15 | — |
| International runs | 8,352 | — |
| ODI average | 53.51 | — |
| Commonwealth golds | 1 | — |
| Wins as captain | 150 | — |
| Test runs | — | 13,378 |
| ODI runs | — | 13,704 |
| World Cups | — | 3 |
| Test centuries | — | 41 |
| Test average | — | 51.85 |
| Test wins as captain | — | 48 |
| Dominance w25% | 88 | 86 |
| Peak w20% | 92 | 89 |
| Longevity w20% | 82 | 90 |
| Honours w20% | 92 | 88 |
| Statistics w15% | 90 | 92 |
Meg Lanning leads with a GOAT score of 88.7 against 88.7 for Ricky Ponting — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Ponting scores higher on statistics, longevity. Lanning leads on peak, dominance, honours.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Lanning: 88.7, Ponting: 88.7.
Make your case for Lanning vs Ponting. 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.