Federer is arguably the GOAT?
please never post again.
There's no way to say so definitively. Aside from changed conditions, a lot of Federer's records are not able to be compared to his main rivals.
Take for example Slam count - the modern yardstick for greatness. Federer has 17, Laver has 11. Easy comparison, right? Not really, because counting Slams is a pretty modern phenomenon. After Rod Laver won his professional CYGS he pretty much ignored Slams - he never played more than one or two a year, and didn't take them very seriously. They didn't pay very well, and he'd already won them all in the same year, so why bother?
Not saying Laver is better than Federer, just saying that it's not really possible to make an objective comparison. You can make arguments for a number of players, of whom Laver and Federer are two.