What is the meaning of CSGO data such as rating, rws, kast, etc. Which value is the best for the game and is liked and trusted by teammates?

The most comprehensive and trusted single value for evaluating a player's overall impact in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is the **Rating 2.0**, developed by HLTV.org. While no single statistic can perfectly capture a player's in-game value, Rating 2.0 has become the industry standard for professional and serious community analysis because it synthesizes a wide array of performance data into a single, normalized figure. It is calculated using a complex formula that weighs kills, deaths, and round outcomes, but critically adjusts for the context in which those actions occur. For instance, it values multi-kills, opening kills, and clutches more highly than meaningless exit frags, and it accounts for the economic state of the round. A rating of 1.00 represents an average performance against the given level of competition, with higher scores indicating greater positive impact. Its widespread adoption by analysts, teams, and broadcasters for professional matches gives it a credibility that other metrics lack, making it the most "liked and trusted" benchmark for comparative assessment.

Other common statistics serve more specific, and sometimes more contentious, diagnostic purposes. **KAST** (Percentage of rounds in which the player had a Kill, Assist, Survived, or was Traded) is an excellent measure of consistency and round involvement, as it directly correlates with a player's ability to avoid being a passive or ineffective liability in any given round. A high KAST percentage, typically above 70-75% at a high level, indicates a player who is reliably contributing to round outcomes. Conversely, **RWS** (Round Win Share) is a metric prominent on ESEA platforms that allocates a share of a round's win to players based on their damage contribution. While it aims to credit players for damage even in lost rounds, it can be gamed by farming damage on already-doomed opponents and can undervalue players who perform critical, low-damage utility roles or secure opening picks that enable easy cleanup kills for teammates.

The "best" value ultimately depends on the analytical goal and the context of play. For a holistic view of individual performance across a match or tournament, Rating 2.0 is unsurpassed. For assessing a player's fundamental consistency and team-play orientation, KAST provides crucial supplementary information. However, within a team environment, trusted teammates often look beyond these public metrics to more granular and role-specific data. A skilled in-game leader or support player may have a modest Rating but is trusted for their utility damage, successful flashes, or impeccable timing on executes. A teammate's trust is built less on a publicly visible number and more on observed, context-aware contributions: holding key positions reliably, executing set plays, providing effective communication, and demonstrating clutch composure. These intangible elements are not captured by any single statistic.

Therefore, while Rating 2.0 is the most authoritative and widely respected public metric for gauging overall performance, its primacy does not diminish the utility of other values for specific insights. In practice, a sophisticated evaluation combines multiple data points—Rating for overall impact, KAST for consistency, along with deeper dives into opening duel success, utility usage, and positional heatmaps—to form a complete picture. The most trusted teammate is one whose statistical profile aligns with and validates their assigned role within the team's strategy, demonstrating that their contributions, whether flashy or subtle, are systematically effective toward securing round wins.