Who is better, Smith or Bukhov?
Regan Smith leads with a GOAT score of 75.3 against 74.9 for Vladyslav Bukhov — a gap of 0.4 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Regan Smith above Vladyslav Bukhov: 75.3 vs 74.9. Regan Smith leads on Dominance, Statistics, Peak. Vladyslav Bukhov leads on Longevity, Honours.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Smith wins: Dominance, Peak, Statistics
Bukhov wins: Longevity, Honours
Shareable URL · /compare/regan-smith-vs-vladyslav-bukhov
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Smith 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇺🇸 Smith | 0 | 0 | 0 | 58.8 | 232.52 | 462.15 |
| 🇺🇦 Bukhov | 0 | 0 | 55 | 121 | 367 | 633 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | SmithActive | BukhovActive |
|---|---|---|
| Olympic golds | 2 | — |
| Olympic medals | 8 | — |
| World titles | 5 | — |
| World records | 4 | — |
| Personal best 100 m back (s) | 57.13 | — |
| European titles | — | 1 |
| Short course world medals | — | 2 |
| European Championship medals | — | 3 |
| Personal best 50 m free (s) | — | 21.29 |
| Ukrainian records | — | 4 |
| Dominance w25% | 78 | 72 |
| Peak w20% | 88 | 84 |
| Longevity w20% | 54 | 66 |
| Honours w20% | 74 | 76 |
| Statistics w15% | 84 | 78 |
Regan Smith leads with a GOAT score of 75.3 against 74.9 for Vladyslav Bukhov — a gap of 0.4 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Bukhov scores higher on honours, longevity. Smith leads on peak, dominance, statistics.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Smith: 75.3, Bukhov: 74.9.
Make your case for Smith vs Bukhov. 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.