I'd like to propose, on the subject of Gholdengo, that it doesn't actually have to be that good at its job to be worth consideration. I know that sounds insane, but just think about it: consideration of how much or little it beats in the meta as a factor in its viability presupposes that beating it actually matters.
It's true that Gholdengo can lose 1v1 to Great Tusk. It's true that common Gholdengo sets lose to Kingambit. Whatever they may be, it's clear that from a threat perspective, Gholdengo is not inherently overcentralizing and has answers that unquestionably beat it. Additionally, when it's gone, it obviously can't block hazard removal. So then, let's consider how much impact that has actually had on the metagame. For the first time in a long time (ever?), Ribombee is OU by usage. Right now, hazard stack as an archetype is incredibly strong, with Gliscor only making it better. Cinderace is not only common, but runs Court Change on 93% of its movesets. The second most common defogger, Mandibuzz, is almost 3 times less common than Corviknight. Any other possible alternatives fall off even harder. Causality aside, the hazard metagame is currently very clearly biased in favor of removal being significantly worse than hazard setting.
Does Gholdengo cause the power of hazard stack by itself? I don't think so. Gliscor, as one of the main drivers of the hazard stacking environment currently, would be good with or without Gholdengo around for it to benefit from. Even without the protection to its hazards that Gholdengo provides, it would still use the free turns it generates to get up spikes. Even without Gliscor, Ting-Lu would exist to fulfill its role. Rocks are, as always, easy to splash on a variety of mons - though Great Tusk again deserves special mention.
That said, while evaluating the presence of hazard stack as an archetype may be informative as a consideration of the power Gholdengo exerts outside of itself, it is not actually necessary to consider the impact and influence of Gholdengo itself. As it stands, the hazard removal metagame itself is completely driven by Gholdengo. There is essentially one form of hazard removal in the entire tier that is actually somewhat reliable in the face of Gholdengo, and that is Cinderace's court change. This is plain to see in the composition of balance teams, which essentially have a non-negotiable Cinderace slot, with an additional slot potentially set aside for a backup Gholdengo-capable remover like Great Tusk. Whether or not Gholdengo actually wins the 1v1 against Great Tusk or other hypothetical hazard removers ends up being entirely insubstantial to its effectiveness. You can't presuppose beating it, because in the event matchup conditions do not allow you to readily maneuver your hazard remover around, Gholdengo may simply entirely invalidate your only chances to remove hazards in the game.
Even in the context of hyper offense teams, which struggle significantly harder to keep Gholdengo around for the long haul, sacking Gholdengo's HP to get chip on the opponent's hazard removal so that they cannot do their job later is entirely worth it, and usually suffices to maintain hazards. It is no accident that 80% of Ribombee are accompanied by a Gholdengo.
So long as Gholdengo sticks around, it will exert a negative influence on the metagame by signficantly dampening the possible avenues for hazard control. Even in games where it isn't present itself, the teambuilding considerations forced by Gholdengo's presence are beneficial to hazard stacking archetypes, as teams either have to forego reliable hazard control in favor of just using a Cinderace, or sacrifice significant pressure to run multiple hazard removers. I would very much like to see a metagame without it.
(All stats pulled from 1695 DLC1).