Shubman Gill 13th on World's Most Marketable Athletes List, Ahead of Messi and Ronaldo — But the Maths Behind the Ranking Matters

A story about Shubman Gill is doing the rounds that has far more to do with market data than with the cricket field. In the "50 Most Marketable Athletes 2026" list released by Sportspro and NorthStar Solutions Group, the Indian cricketer sits at 13th place. The list was built by filtering 1,202 athletes from 70 sports worldwide, shortlisting 247 names and finally settling on a top 50. Gill is the highest-placed cricketer on that list — and that is the core of the story.

But there is a basic distinction that needs to be understood in the way the item is being presented in headlines. Gill's 13th place is not proof that he is a "bigger" athlete or more famous than Lionel Messi or Cristiano Ronaldo. It is evidence that his score in a specific, weighted marketing model came out above those giants. The list-makers themselves concede that popularity and commercial appeal may not be the same thing. That part of the report deserves the most attention, because the gap between the headline and the methodology is precisely where the story hides.

What the list contains

Gill is 13th on this year's list. Immediately behind him are Cristiano Ronaldo at 14th, Kylian Mbappe at 19th and Lionel Messi at 27th. In other words, three of football's biggest global figures sit below an Indian cricketer on a list that measures marketability. That fact is correct in itself and is recorded exactly that way in the report. The question is not whether Gill is 13th; the question is what 13th place measures.

India's presence on the list is not limited to Gill. A total of five Indian athletes have made the top 50, which reflects the depth of the Indian sports market and the commercial weight of the world's largest cricket market. By contrast, the three biggest names in Indian cricket are outside the top 50 this time — MS Dhoni is 83rd, Virat Kohli 85th and Rohit Sharma 90th. Note that Dhoni has retired from international cricket and is still inside the top 100. That in itself signals the longevity of Indian brands.

On Gill, the report describes him as "India's Test and ODI captain." That is a cricketing-status reference sitting inside a commercial story. The report does not name him T20I captain. This suggests India's captaincy may be split across formats, or that the descriptor reflects a specific point in time. It is not a major issue for the story, but it does show the time-frame and context in which the list was built.

The maths: 45-40-15

The most important thing about this list is its methodology. It is built on a 100-point system split into three parts — 45 points for Brand Equity, 40 for Momentum and 15 for Commercial Trajectory. Broadly, this means an athlete's established brand value — their "settled" identity — accounts for 45 per cent, while how fast their commercial popularity is growing accounts for 40 per cent. Growth rate carries almost as much weight as existing standing.

The consequence of this method is that an athlete whose market is still opening up and whose popularity is rising fast can overtake global giants who are close to the peak of their brand equity. Messi and Ronaldo are near that point globally where further growth is limited. Their fame has not declined, but its rate of growth has slowed. Gill, by contrast, operates in the world's largest cricket market, where public interest is rising steadily with his captaincy. In this structure it is entirely possible that his scores on the momentum and trajectory pillars are high.

One more thing is worth understanding here — momentum accounts for 40 per cent, which means Gill's position is inherently volatile. If his rate of commercial growth normalises, his placement could fall sharply even without any decline in his current popularity. The 45 per cent weighting, on the other hand, benefits players whose brand standing has been built over years. That is why names that topped the list a few years ago are still inside the top 100, even when they are not playing competitive cricket.

The scale of the data

This list is not assembled by guesswork. According to the report, it uses 27 indicators and several hundred data points per athlete. Relationships with more than 3,000 brands are also assessed. The signals include social media followers, viewership, search trends, public sentiment and partnerships. This is the 17th annual edition, meaning the list has been built consistently and its methodology is public. That transparency is itself significant, because it allows scrutiny and verification, which most opaque valuation indices lack.

The assessment window for the list is stated as 1 July 2026 to 30 June 2026. This is a forward-looking window, which directly means the list labelled "2026" is not an accounting of a completed sporting season. It is an assessment of the current or upcoming commercial cycle. Readers need one caution here: the list's time-point and the reader's "present" may not coincide.

At the top of the list is tennis player Aryna Sabalenka. According to the report, her 2026 earnings were $30 million and she has deals with brands including Nike, Wilson, Gucci, Emirates, Audemars Piguet, Hup and Stella Artois. That figure hints at how far top-tier endorsement money goes — and also that this list is not ordered primarily by earnings. It is a brand-valuation model.

Marketability and popularity are not the same

The most balanced part of the story is that the report itself states that popularity and commercial appeal may not be the same thing. That sentence gets buried under the headline, but read seriously it changes the direction of the entire discussion. "Gill ahead of Messi" does not mean that anyone anywhere knows him better than Messi, or that his earnings exceed Messi's, or that he is a bigger player than Messi. It means that in a specific model that gives strong weight to growth rate, his score came out higher.

Another point worth noting — the report does not disclose the point totals for Gill, Messi or Ronaldo. That means it does not even say how large the gap is. Whether Gill is 13th and Ronaldo 14th by a few decimal points or by a wide margin, the reader cannot know. When per-athlete scores are unavailable and the time window is set forward-looking, list positions should be read as a directional signal, not a precise measurement.

One interesting aspect of the ranking method is that it can structurally favour athletes from high-traffic markets such as India. That is not bias, it is market logic — where there are more viewers, more searches and more brand interest, the model's score will go higher. The direct implication is that Gill's high placement is substantially a function of cricket's structural prominence in India. Adjust for market size and the comparison would look very different.

There are no cricket numbers here

It is important to understand that this entire report contains no reference to any of Gill's batting numbers. No average, no strike rate, no recent form trend, no home-away or pace-spin split. The only quantitative facts attached to Gill in the list are commercial — 13th place, the status of highest-placed cricketer, and being one of five Indians in the top 50. Extracting a technical or statistical assessment of his batting from this story is therefore impossible, and attempting it would produce speculation.

The same applies to the comparison drawing the most attention. Kohli is 85th, Dhoni 83rd and Rohit 90th, while Gill is 13th. Treating that gap as a gap in batting quality would be wrong. It is a gap in marketability, particularly under a method that weights growth rate. A settled giant's brand is at a stage where rapid growth is limited; a rising star has plenty of room. That is a feature of the method, not a verdict on ability.

Interestingly, Gill is still early in his career. Both his commercial and sporting peaks are likely ahead. His current position should therefore be read not as a final conclusion but as a snapshot of one stage of a rising career. It is likewise possible that his momentum score is partly a new-captaincy narrative effect rather than years of sustained brand growth.

What the story really means, and its risk

The firmest conclusion from this report is that the commercial dominance of Indian cricket is structural. Five Indians in the top 50 and a retired legend still inside the top 100 show how deep India's commercial talent pool is. This is a direct result of India's market size, broadcast scale and public engagement with cricket, not of any single on-field performance.

The biggest risk in this story is exactly that — the risk of interpretation. Readers may take "Gill ahead of Messi-Ronaldo" as a statement about absolute fame or sporting standing, when in fact it is the output of a weighted brand-momentum model. A second risk is the volatility of the metric — with momentum at 40 per cent, the position is not durable and can change in the next edition. A third is public reaction, because framing of this kind can invite pushback or ridicule from global sports audiences and put unnecessary pressure on a young Indian player.

Worth noting is that this entire story contains no signal of any sporting performance, injury, disciplinary or financial crisis. It is purely a commercial-list story, and its real value lies in recording Indian cricket's market standing on an international scale. But while reading it, one simple rule should be kept in mind: a marketing ranking is not a measurement of sporting strength or absolute fame. The headline is exciting, the methodology is sober — and the truth of the story lies in the methodology, not the headline.