Within every country, the same patterns appear
Geography shows us where the world leans. But within each country, individuals differ from one another for predictable reasons. We tested a long list of demographic, psychological, and country-level factors in our analyses. Five things stood out — and most of them weren't demographics.
Politics matters more than demographics.
A person's political position predicts their football preference more reliably than their age, gender, education, or income. Across every one of the 26 countries we surveyed, the same pattern emerged: left-leaning respondents lean toward Messi, right-leaning respondents lean toward Ronaldo.
The pattern holds across cultures.
Whether the country itself leans Messi or Ronaldo overall, the within-country ideology effect is consistent. A Korean liberal and an Argentine liberal both lean Messi, relative to their compatriots. A Turkish conservative and an American conservative both lean Ronaldo, relative to theirs.
Age changes how strong the effect is.
Among younger adults, ideology and football preference move together sharply. Among older adults, the link nearly disappears.
Short-form video viewers lean Ronaldo.
People who get their news from TikTok or Reels lean Ronaldo — a finding consistent with Ronaldo's dominance on those platforms. Traditional media users (TV, newspapers, radio) show no clear pattern.
Country institutions don't add much.
We tested press freedom, FIFA rankings, and democracy indices at the country level. None of these significantly predicts how a country leans. The action is within countries, not between them.
The pages that follow show the full evidence — and let you find where you'd fit.
What predicts preferring Ronaldo over Messi?
Across 10,661 respondents in 26 countries, these are the factors that independently predict football preference. Bars to the left lean Messi; bars to the right lean Ronaldo. The longer the bar, the stronger the effect.
Political ideology is the strongest individual-level predictor: bigger than age, gender, education, or income. Self-esteem, authoritarian values, and short-form video use also predict preference, but the effects are smaller.
Stronger liberal-democracy institutions are marginally associated with a Messi lean at the country level (p = .079). FIFA ranking, a proxy for football strength, does not predict preference.
Two-level mixed-effects model. Individual-level predictors are group-mean centred at country level; country-level predictors are grand-mean centred. Unstandardised coefficients (b); 95% confidence intervals shown as translucent bands. Full model details available in the preprint.
How much does politics shape your football preference?
Pick your age and your political position. The model will show how strong the football-preference pattern is for someone like you and how it compares across age groups.
What the GOAT debate is really about
When you assemble the data, the question shifts.
Rome, 2009. The only time they would meet in a Champions League final.
Photo: Ph.FAB / Shutterstock
The question is no longer who is the greatest? By every available empirical measure, that question is too close to call. The data instead answers a different question: why do people disagree about it? And the answer is that the disagreement is patterned. Where you live shapes who you call the GOAT. So does who you are. And the two layers, geography and individual values, point in the same direction.
Across 26 countries, Messi and Ronaldo have come to embody two answers to what greatness should mean. One is about work, will, and individual dominance. The other is about vision, collective play, and the perfect pass. People sort themselves between these two answers in ways that line up with their politics, their media diets, and the cultural textures of the places they live. The pattern is sharper among younger respondents than older ones, a finding consistent with a body of research on how political identity has come to infuse non-political domains. The debate, for all its noise, is doing serious cultural work.
This survey can show that the pattern exists. It cannot prove what causes it. It cannot resolve which player is actually greater. That question is empirical, and the empirical answer is too close to call. And it cannot speak to how preferences change as the players age, retire, and pass into football memory. These are real limits, and the findings should be read inside them.
What is left, then, is the argument itself. Who is the greatest? depends on what greatness means to you. That is the question this survey does not answer. It only shows that the people answering it are not answering it alone.
Image credits: Photo of Cristiano Ronaldo and Lionel Messi by Ph.FAB / Shutterstock. All images used under editorial license.
