I like numbers. They tell their own story and they rarely add bullshit like people do. Draw your own conclusions, but I'm going to run through some facts: Fact 1 Conor and Khabib both have 10 UFC fights Facts 2 and 3 Conor is 9-1 in the UFC Khabib is 10-0 in the UFC Edit - Double checked my numbers. Original incorrect numbers in red, updated numbers in green. Worth noting, not counting draws or NCs, as they throw a monkey wrench into the fold. Facts 4-7 Conor's UFC opponents are a combined 107-52 (67.30 winning %) in their own UFC fights Conor's UFC opponents are a combined 102-50 (67.11 winning %) in their own UFC fights Conor's UFC opponents are a combined 208-74 (73.76 winning %) in all of their fights Khabib's UFC opponents are a combined 82-60 (57.75 winning %) in their own UFC fights Khabib's UFC opponents are a combined 80-59 (57.55 winning %) in their own UFC fights Khabib's UFC opponents are a combined 203-95 (68.12 winning %) in all of their fights My conclusion is that Conor has fought significantly better UFC opponents than Khabib and will soundly defeat him when they fight. Interested in other conclusions and kindly ask that they're backed by data. Adding another piece of data for those who feel that the original analysis is lacking: Khabib has stopped 4 of his 10 UFC opponents for a finishing rate of 40% Khabib's UFC opponents have been stopped 31 times in 139 UFC fights for a getting finished rate of 22.30% Therefore, Khabib is 1.79x more likely to finish a UFC opponent based on their propensity to get finished Conor has stopped 7 of his 10 UFC opponents for a finishing rate of 70% Conor's UFC opponents have been stopped 23 times in 152 UFC fights for a getting finished rate of 15.13% Therefore, Conor is 4.63x more likely to finish a UFC opponent based on their propensity to get finished Funny that everyone is praising Khabib's smashing ability, but the numbers simply don't support it. Adding another piece of data. Opponents sorted by all-time ranking using FightMatrix. Finishes in green. Yes, I've grown tired of people pointing out that you can't compare FWs to LWs but the reality is that you can. Anthony Pettis is an example of a highly succesful LW who didn't have runaway success at FW so the best fighters in these two divisions can be argued to be consistently competitive with each other. There is enough data to suggest that the Jose Aldo that Conor McGregor defeated would beat any of the LWs that Khabib beat (outside of RDA) if the fight took place at LW. Now, I'm not so sure that the Jose Aldo that Conor McGregor beat would beat the RDA that Khabib beat, but I do think it would be a very competitive matchup. There is however, reliable evidence to suggest that the 2016 version of Eddie Alvarez that Conor defeated would beat the 2014 version of RDA that Khabib defeated. Eddie Alvarez finished RDA in 2016 before losing to Conor. Perhaps you'd like to argue that RDA declined as a fighter after his loss to Khabib? Not easy to considering that RDA then went on the best win streak of his career. Who here thinks that the Max Holloway that Conor defeated would lose (at LW) to the Michael Johnson, Al Iaquinta, Pat Healy or Gleison Tibau that Khabib defeated. I, for one, do not.