⚔️HEAD-TO-HEAD
Kane Williamson vs Shubman Gill — International Fantasy Cricket Stats Comparison
Kane Williamson has the edge on the headline numbers: Kane Williamson leads on T20I batting (2,575 runs, avg 33.4). Full T20I, ODI, Test and IPL stats are below.
Kane Williamson (New Zealand) has 2,575 T20I runs at avg 33.4 in 93 matches. Shubman Gill (India) has 869 T20I runs at avg 28.0 in 36 matches. Head-to-head batting, bowling & fielding across T20I, ODI & Test.
Full season · batting · bowling · fielding · MOTM · form
Kane Williamson vs Shubman Gill — Stat Comparison Table
Head-to-head numbers at a glance. Higher value is highlighted in green (lower is better for economy and bowling/batting averages).
| Statistic | Kane Williamson | Shubman Gill |
|---|---|---|
| Matches | 1 | 20 |
| Avg fantasy points | 69 | 109 |
| Best fantasy score | 69 | 329 |
| Runs | 18 | 1288 |
| Strike rate | 47.4 | 113.5 |
| Fours | 2 | 163 |
| Sixes | 0 | 29 |
| Half-centuries (50+) | 0 | 6 |
| Centuries (100+) | 0 | 5 |
| Highest score | 18 | 223 |
| Economy rate | 0.00 | 4.00 |
| Catches | 4 | 12 |
| Total dismissals | 4 | 15 |
| Statistic | Kane Williamson | Shubman Gill |
|---|---|---|
| Matches | 93 | 36 |
| Runs | 2575 | 869 |
| Batting average | 33.44 | 28.03 |
| Strike rate | 126.2 | — |
| Centuries (100+) | 0 | 1 |
| Half-centuries (50+) | 18 | 3 |
| Wickets | 6 | 0 |
| Bowling average | 27.33 | — |
| Economy rate | 8.34 | — |
📋 Format by format
T20I. Kane Williamson has played 93 T20Is and Shubman Gill 36. Kane Williamson has 2,575 runs at 33.4 (strike rate 126.2), against 869 at 28.0 for Shubman Gill, so Kane Williamson has scored more. Hundreds: Kane Williamson 0, Shubman Gill 1. Fifties: 18 and 3. Kane Williamson also bowls: 6 wickets at an economy of 8.34, while Shubman Gill has not taken a T20I wicket.
ODI. Kane Williamson has played 175 ODIs and Shubman Gill 70. Kane Williamson has 7,256 runs at 48.7 (strike rate 82.9), against 3,713 at 64.0 for Shubman Gill, so Kane Williamson has scored more. Hundreds: Kane Williamson 15, Shubman Gill 11. Fifties: 47 and 20. Kane Williamson also bowls: 37 wickets at an economy of 5.36, while Shubman Gill has not taken a ODI wicket.
Test. Kane Williamson has played 110 Tests and Shubman Gill 43. Kane Williamson has 9,515 runs at 54.1 (strike rate 52.3), against 3,043 at 43.5 for Shubman Gill, so Kane Williamson has scored more. Hundreds: Kane Williamson 33, Shubman Gill 11. Fifties: 38 and 8. Kane Williamson also bowls: 30 wickets at an economy of 3.37, while Shubman Gill has not taken a Test wicket.
International numbers up to 23 August 2026.
Kane Williamson vs Shubman Gill — T20I is a highly-debated cricket matchup. Below are their T20I career highlights.
T20I career: Kane Williamson has scored 2,575 T20I runs in 93 matches at an average of 33.44, with 18 half-centuries. He has also taken 6 T20I wickets at an average of 27.33 with an economy of 8.34.
T20I career: Shubman Gill has scored 869 T20I runs in 36 matches at an average of 28.03, with 1 century.
Fantasy Impact: From a pure fantasy perspective, Shubman Gill is the stronger pick with an average of 109 pts per game in recent fantasy cricket. Always check the playing XI and toss before locking in your captain.
Stats are sourced from international career records. Compare more players using our Player Comparison Tool.
Who has better fantasy stats — Kane Williamson or Shubman Gill?
Kane Williamson vs Shubman Gill — who is a better fantasy captain?
Who has a better strike rate — Kane Williamson or Shubman Gill?
What is the price difference between Kane Williamson and Shubman Gill?
How many MOTM awards have Kane Williamson and Shubman Gill won?
Should I pick Kane Williamson or Shubman Gill in my fantasy XI?
Who has more T20I runs, Kane Williamson or Shubman Gill?
Who has more ODI runs, Kane Williamson or Shubman Gill?
Who has more Test runs, Kane Williamson or Shubman Gill?
SETTLE IT IN A GAME
Numbers only get you so far. Pick a side — Kane Williamson or Shubman Gill — and see who actually delivers.
Found an issue or have a suggestion? Contact us — we’d love to hear from you.