Side-by-side evidence-based comparison of Islam, Evolution/Naturalism, Agnosticism using Faithscore's six weighted evidentiary criteria. Same rubric, applied uniformly.
Highest aggregate Faithscore: Islam (58/100). The compared field spans 46 points across the same uniform rubric.
This comparison evaluates Islam and Evolution/Naturalism and Agnosticism against the same six weighted evidentiary criteria — textual fidelity, historical verification, scientific testability, internal consistency, prophetic accuracy, and explanatory power — that Faithscore applies to all 313 systems in its registry. Aggregated across those criteria, Islam receives the highest overall score (58/100), indicating limited support, with notable gaps in historical or predictive verification. Evolution/Naturalism receives the lowest of the compared systems (12/100), indicating failing support across most weighted criteria when scored against verifiable evidence. The arithmetic mean across the comparison is 35/100.
The 46-point spread is large enough that the ranking is unlikely to invert under reasonable methodological adjustments. The lower-scoring system has structural gaps in multiple criteria, not merely lower performance in one. Adherent counts are within an order of magnitude across the systems compared, so demographic weight is not a confounding factor in the comparison. The systems compared belong to different worldview categories, so the ranking should be read as a cross-category evaluation against a single uniform rubric — not as an artifact of category-specific assumptions.
It is important to note what this comparison does not claim. A higher Faithscore is not a metaphysical proof; it is a structured summary of how a system performs on six measurable axes the framework treats as evidentially relevant. Sincere adherents may reasonably weight criteria differently than this rubric does, and a low score on one criterion does not negate the explanatory or experiential value a tradition has for its community. The methodology is published in full and the per-criterion scores are reproducible from the cited source data, so any disagreement can be located precisely — at the rubric level, the criterion level, or the underlying evidence level.
Each of the six weighted criteria, scored independently. The system with the higher score on each row is noted; aggregate ranking follows from the weighted total, not from a simple count of category wins.
Faithscore applies court-like evidentiary standards across six weighted criteria. Every system is scored against the same rubric — religious or philosophical — to surface objective comparisons. Read the full methodology.
Jump to the per-criterion breakdown above:
This page's underlying scores are exposed at the structured JSON endpoints listed below. Citation: "Data: faithscore.org (CC BY 4.0)".