Who is better, DeMarco or Lomachenko?
Tony DeMarco leads with a GOAT score of 82.0 against 81.9 for Vasiliy Lomachenko — 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 Tony DeMarco above Vasiliy Lomachenko: 82.0 vs 81.9. Tony DeMarco leads on Longevity, Statistics. Vasiliy Lomachenko leads on Honours, Dominance.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →DeMarco wins: Longevity, Statistics
Lomachenko wins: Dominance, Honours
Shareable URL · /compare/tony-demarco-vs-vasiliy-lomachenko
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
DeMarco 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇺🇸 DeMarco | 0 | 0 | 45 | 97 | 224 | 651 |
| 🇺🇦 Lomachenko | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 year periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | DeMarcoRetired | LomachenkoRetired |
|---|---|---|
| World titles | 1 | — |
| Career wins | 58 | — |
| Knockouts | 33 | — |
| Career bouts | 71 | — |
| Fight of the Year appearances | 2 | — |
| Olympic golds | — | 2 |
| World titles in weight classes | — | 3 |
| Amateur record wins | — | 396 |
| Professional wins | — | 18 |
| Professional losses | — | 3 |
| Dominance w25% | 78 | 82 |
| Peak w20% | 90 | 90 |
| Longevity w20% | 80 | 70 |
| Honours w20% | 78 | 84 |
| Statistics w15% | 86 | 84 |
Tony DeMarco leads with a GOAT score of 82.0 against 81.9 for Vasiliy Lomachenko — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Lomachenko scores higher on dominance, honours. DeMarco leads on statistics, longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. DeMarco: 82.0, Lomachenko: 81.9.
Make your case for DeMarco vs Lomachenko. 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.