Who is better, Astapchuk or Yang?
Yang Chuan-kwang leads with a GOAT score of 87.0 against 86.7 for Nadzeya Astapchuk — a gap of 0.3 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Yang Chuan-kwang above Nadzeya Astapchuk: 87.0 vs 86.7. Yang Chuan-kwang leads on Dominance, Peak. Nadzeya Astapchuk leads on Longevity, Statistics.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Yang wins: Dominance, Peak
Astapchuk wins: Longevity, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/nadzeya-ostapchuk-vs-yang-chuan-kwang
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Yang 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇧🇾 Astapchuk | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 57.6 | 139.7 |
| 🇹🇼 Yang | 0 | 0 | 45 | 97 | 292 | 644 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | AstapchukRetired | YangRetired |
|---|---|---|
| World Championship golds | 2 | — |
| World indoor golds | 2 | — |
| Shot put best | 21.7 | — |
| European titles | 1 | — |
| National titles | 12 | — |
| Olympic silver medals | — | 1 |
| World records set | — | 1 |
| Asian Games titles | — | 3 |
| Decathlon personal best | — | 9,121 |
| NCAA titles | — | 2 |
| Dominance w25% | 82 | 86 |
| Peak w20% | 92 | 94 |
| Longevity w20% | 86 | 82 |
| Honours w20% | 84 | 84 |
| Statistics w15% | 92 | 90 |
Yang Chuan-kwang leads with a GOAT score of 87.0 against 86.7 for Nadzeya Astapchuk — a gap of 0.3 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Astapchuk scores higher on statistics, longevity. Yang leads on peak, dominance.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Astapchuk: 86.7, Yang: 87.0.
Make your case for Astapchuk vs Yang. 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.