| François Cevert | Kimi Antonelli | |
|---|---|---|
| Career | ||
| Championships | — | — |
| Career span | 1969–1973 | 2025–2026 |
| Seasons | 5 | 2 |
| Race starts | 47 | 35 |
| Teams | Tecno, March, Tyrrell | Mercedes |
| Wins & podiums era-dependent · not directly comparable across eras | ||
| Wins | 1 | 6 |
| Podiums | 13 | 12 |
| Poles | 0 | 6 |
| Fastest laps | 2 | 9 |
| Era-fair rates career rate · across all seasons | ||
| Win % | 2.1% | 17.1% |
| Podium % | 27.7% | 34.3% |
| Pole % | 0.0% | 17.1% |
| Reliability & consistency era-dependent · see explanation | ||
| DNF rate | 38.3% | 11.4% |
| Points-finish rate | 40.4% | 65.7% |
| Points scoring-era variable · not directly comparable | ||
| Career total | 89 | 369 |
The share of race starts that ended without a classified finish. Formula: races not finished ÷ race starts × 100. Races the driver did not start are excluded from both sides. A disqualification counts as a finish that scored nothing, not a DNF. Why it sits apart from the era-fair rates: unlike a win or a podium, finishing meant something very different in different eras. Cars in the 1950s–70s broke constantly; modern cars almost always reach the flag. A high DNF rate in 1955 says far more about the machinery than the driver. Comparing two drivers within the same season is meaningful — they faced the same conditions. Across eras it's context, not a verdict.
The share of race starts that ended in a points-paying position. Formula: races finished in a scoring position ÷ race starts × 100, using that season's real points system. Why it's era-dependent: the number of positions that pay points has changed repeatedly — the top five scored in 1950, the top ten score today. A modern driver has roughly twice as many scoring positions available for the same relative performance, so a higher percentage doesn't necessarily mean a better driver. Like DNF rate, it's shown as context.