Clubs Compare

AC Milan vs Ferencvarosi TC

Real strength. Different football profiles.

AC Milan

Serie A · 2026-2027

Rating as of 20 Oct 2026
Power66.2

Ferencvarosi TC

UEFA Europa League · 2026-2027

Rating as of 20 Oct 2026
Power56.8
The football profile

Club DNA

AC MilanFerencvarosi TC

Strength Profile · Current

Fixed 0–100 ratings. Power is the Elo baseline; Attack and Defence use a common reference opponent. Form is opponent-adjusted.

Strength profile radarCommon axes run from zero at the centre to 100 at the edge. Exact values appear alongside. A missing metric leaves the shape incomplete. 255075100 Power Attack Defence Form Consistency Squad Availability AC Milan · Power 66.2 ptsAC Milan · Attack 71.5 ptsAC Milan · Defence 69.3 ptsAC Milan · Form 73.9 ptsAC Milan · Consistency 57.9 ptsAC Milan · Squad Availability 92.2 % Ferencvarosi TC · Power 56.8 ptsFerencvarosi TC · Attack 60.8 ptsFerencvarosi TC · Defence 55.8 ptsFerencvarosi TC · Squad Availability 98.8 % Strength profile radarCommon axes run from zero at the centre to 100 at the edge. Exact values appear alongside. A missing metric leaves the shape incomplete. 255075100 Power Attack Defence Form Consistency SquadAvailability AC Milan · Power 66.2 ptsAC Milan · Attack 71.5 ptsAC Milan · Defence 69.3 ptsAC Milan · Form 73.9 ptsAC Milan · Consistency 57.9 ptsAC Milan · Squad Availability 92.2 % Ferencvarosi TC · Power 56.8 ptsFerencvarosi TC · Attack 60.8 ptsFerencvarosi TC · Defence 55.8 ptsFerencvarosi TC · Squad Availability 98.8 %
Ratings · 0–100 · Availability is a percentage

Strength comparison

Point gaps · Availability in percentage points

66.2Power56.8
AC Milan +9.4 pts
71.5Attack60.8
AC Milan +10.7 pts
69.3Defence55.8
AC Milan +13.5 pts
73.9Form—
Shared data unavailable
57.9Consistency—
Shared data unavailable
92.2%Squad Availability98.8%
Ferencvarosi TC +6.6 pp

Consistency measures variation in points minus LOAD90 expected points, centred on the club’s average gap. Higher means less variation, not better results. Squad Availability is the percentage of model-weighted squad available for the last completed match, using its saved pre-match snapshot. It does not predict readiness for the next match. Missing historical data stays unavailable.

What separates them

The Difference

  • AC Milan holds the defensive advantage.
  • AC Milan has the stronger attacking profile.
  • AC Milan has the higher Power rating.
  • Ferencvarosi TC had more of its weighted squad available for its last completed match.
Descriptive rating gaps, not a match forecast. Small gaps are left out; missing ratings are not compared.

AC Milan · Form 5/5 · Consistency 20/20 covered matches · 3 pre-match / 17 historical forecast backfills · Availability · last completed match 18 Oct 2026

Ferencvarosi TC · Form 2/5 · Consistency 12/12 covered matches · 1 pre-match / 11 historical forecast backfills · Availability · last completed match 15 Oct 2026

How Consistency works

For each match, gap = points earned − LOAD90 expected points. Consistency = 100 × (1 − SD(gaps) / 3), with SD calculated around the window’s mean gap. The endpoints come from the mathematical bounds of point gaps; this is not a fitted percentile or a forecast factor. A constant positive or negative gap can be consistent.

Current uses the latest 20 completed tracked matches within one year. At least 15 usable forecasts and 75% coverage are required. A 15–19-match score is provisional; comparative Consistency insights require 20 each. Historical backfills are reconstructed expectations, not forecasts archived before kickoff. Result randomness and changes in model calibration can affect the score.

AC Milan · Current gap SD 1.26 points · mean gap -0.06 · Full window

Ferencvarosi TC · Current gap SD 1.14 points · mean gap 0.54 · Insufficient sample

Playing Style · Current

Observed profile · last 10 matches before each club’s reference fixture. Native units and coverage are shown below.

Playing style radarEach axis has its own labelled native range, shared by both clubs and both periods. Grid rings mark quarters of those ranges. Exact values appear alongside; missing data leaves the shape incomplete. Possession 0–100 % Pass accuracy 0–100 % Shots in the box 0–100 % On target share 0–100 % Shot Frequency 0–6 shots/100 passes Corner Pressure 0–12 corners/90 AC Milan · Possession 57.4 %AC Milan · Pass accuracy 89.6 %AC Milan · Shots in the box 69.2 %AC Milan · On target share 37.9 %AC Milan · Shot Frequency 2.4 shots/100 passesAC Milan · Corner Pressure 3.7 corners/90 Ferencvarosi TC · Possession 48.3 %Ferencvarosi TC · On target share 46.2 %Ferencvarosi TC · Corner Pressure 6.0 corners/90 Playing style radarEach axis has its own labelled native range, shared by both clubs and both periods. Grid rings mark quarters of those ranges. Exact values appear alongside; missing data leaves the shape incomplete. Possession 0–100 % Passaccuracy 0–100 % Shots inthe box 0–100 % On targetshare 0–100 % ShotFrequency 0–6 shots/100 passes CornerPressure 0–12 corners/90 AC Milan · Possession 57.4 %AC Milan · Pass accuracy 89.6 %AC Milan · Shots in the box 69.2 %AC Milan · On target share 37.9 %AC Milan · Shot Frequency 2.4 shots/100 passesAC Milan · Corner Pressure 3.7 corners/90 Ferencvarosi TC · Possession 48.3 %Ferencvarosi TC · On target share 46.2 %Ferencvarosi TC · Corner Pressure 6.0 corners/90
Native units · axis ranges shown · larger is not better

How they play

Differences in each metric’s native units

57.4%Possession48.3%
AC Milan +9.2 pp
89.6%Pass accuracy—
Shared data unavailable
69.2%Shots in the box—
Shared data unavailable
37.9%On target share46.2%
Ferencvarosi TC +8.3 pp
2.4Shot Frequency—
Shared data unavailable
3.7Corner Pressure6.0
Ferencvarosi TC +2.3 corners/90

Shot Frequency = shots per 100 passes on the same covered matches: how quickly passing sequences turn into attempts. Corner Pressure = corners per completed 90-minute game. These describe attacking tendencies, not strength; extra time and custom-length games are excluded.

These are observed profiles. League and schedule differences can affect them. The radar uses native axis ranges shared by both clubs and both periods; a larger shape does not imply superiority.

AC Milan · Window 10 matches · before 25 Oct 2026 · Shot Frequency 10/10 · Corner Pressure 10/10 covered regulation matches. Per-metric coverage of the four percentage shares is unavailable.

Ferencvarosi TC · Window 10 matches · before 22 Oct 2026 · Shot Frequency 2/10 · Corner Pressure 4/10 covered regulation matches. Per-metric coverage of the four percentage shares is unavailable.

Strength Profile · Season Average

Match-sampled averages of available ratings this season, across tracked competitions. These are not time-weighted averages or a measure of consistency.

Strength profile radarCommon axes run from zero at the centre to 100 at the edge. Exact values appear alongside. A missing metric leaves the shape incomplete. 255075100 Power Attack Defence Form Consistency Squad Availability AC Milan · Power 63.0 ptsAC Milan · Attack 58.2 ptsAC Milan · Defence 67.2 ptsAC Milan · Form 61.9 ptsAC Milan · Consistency 55.4 ptsAC Milan · Squad Availability 90.1 % Strength profile radarCommon axes run from zero at the centre to 100 at the edge. Exact values appear alongside. A missing metric leaves the shape incomplete. 255075100 Power Attack Defence Form Consistency SquadAvailability AC Milan · Power 63.0 ptsAC Milan · Attack 58.2 ptsAC Milan · Defence 67.2 ptsAC Milan · Form 61.9 ptsAC Milan · Consistency 55.4 ptsAC Milan · Squad Availability 90.1 %
Ratings · 0–100 · Availability is a percentage

Strength comparison

Point gaps · Availability in percentage points

63.0Power—
Shared data unavailable
58.2Attack—
Shared data unavailable
67.2Defence—
Shared data unavailable
61.9Form—
Shared data unavailable
55.4Consistency—
Shared data unavailable
90.1%Squad Availability—
Shared data unavailable

Consistency measures variation in points minus LOAD90 expected points, centred on the club’s average gap. Higher means less variation, not better results. Squad Availability is the percentage of model-weighted squad available for the last completed match, using its saved pre-match snapshot. It does not predict readiness for the next match. Missing historical data stays unavailable.

What separates them

The Difference

There is not enough shared rating data to explain an advantage yet.

Descriptive rating gaps, not a match forecast. Small gaps are left out; missing ratings are not compared.

AC Milan · Power 9 · Attack 3 · Defence 3 · Form 6 · Consistency 9 · Squad Availability 3 · 3 pre-match / 6 historical Elo backfills. Minimum 3 observations per average. Consistency averages eligible rolling windows, which overlap; availability uses genuine pre-match snapshots only. Historical Form is reconstructed using the current calibration.

Ferencvarosi TC · Power 2 · Attack 1 · Defence 1 · Form 0 · Consistency 0 · Squad Availability 1 · 1 pre-match / 1 historical Elo backfills. Minimum 3 observations per average. Consistency averages eligible rolling windows, which overlap; availability uses genuine pre-match snapshots only. Historical Form is reconstructed using the current calibration.

How Consistency works

For each match, gap = points earned − LOAD90 expected points. Consistency = 100 × (1 − SD(gaps) / 3), with SD calculated around the window’s mean gap. The endpoints come from the mathematical bounds of point gaps; this is not a fitted percentile or a forecast factor. A constant positive or negative gap can be consistent.

Current uses the latest 20 completed tracked matches within one year. At least 15 usable forecasts and 75% coverage are required. A 15–19-match score is provisional; comparative Consistency insights require 20 each. Historical backfills are reconstructed expectations, not forecasts archived before kickoff. Result randomness and changes in model calibration can affect the score.

AC Milan · Current gap SD 1.26 points · mean gap -0.06 · Full window

Ferencvarosi TC · Current gap SD 1.14 points · mean gap 0.54 · Insufficient sample

Playing Style · Season Average

Observed profile · league season before each club’s reference fixture. Native units and coverage are shown below.

Playing style radarEach axis has its own labelled native range, shared by both clubs and both periods. Grid rings mark quarters of those ranges. Exact values appear alongside; missing data leaves the shape incomplete. Possession 0–100 % Pass accuracy 0–100 % Shots in the box 0–100 % On target share 0–100 % Shot Frequency 0–6 shots/100 passes Corner Pressure 0–12 corners/90 AC Milan · Possession 59.7 %AC Milan · Pass accuracy 89.5 %AC Milan · Shots in the box 67.0 %AC Milan · On target share 38.4 %AC Milan · Shot Frequency 2.1 shots/100 passesAC Milan · Corner Pressure 3.0 corners/90 Playing style radarEach axis has its own labelled native range, shared by both clubs and both periods. Grid rings mark quarters of those ranges. Exact values appear alongside; missing data leaves the shape incomplete. Possession 0–100 % Passaccuracy 0–100 % Shots inthe box 0–100 % On targetshare 0–100 % ShotFrequency 0–6 shots/100 passes CornerPressure 0–12 corners/90 AC Milan · Possession 59.7 %AC Milan · Pass accuracy 89.5 %AC Milan · Shots in the box 67.0 %AC Milan · On target share 38.4 %AC Milan · Shot Frequency 2.1 shots/100 passesAC Milan · Corner Pressure 3.0 corners/90
Native units · axis ranges shown · larger is not better

How they play

Differences in each metric’s native units

59.7%Possession—
Shared data unavailable
89.5%Pass accuracy—
Shared data unavailable
67.0%Shots in the box—
Shared data unavailable
38.4%On target share—
Shared data unavailable
2.1Shot Frequency—
Shared data unavailable
3.0Corner Pressure—
Shared data unavailable

Shot Frequency = shots per 100 passes on the same covered matches: how quickly passing sequences turn into attempts. Corner Pressure = corners per completed 90-minute game. These describe attacking tendencies, not strength; extra time and custom-length games are excluded.

These are observed profiles. League and schedule differences can affect them. The radar uses native axis ranges shared by both clubs and both periods; a larger shape does not imply superiority.

AC Milan · Window 7 matches · before 25 Oct 2026 · Shot Frequency 7/7 · Corner Pressure 7/7 covered regulation matches. Per-metric coverage of the four percentage shares is unavailable.

Ferencvarosi TC · Window 2 matches · before 22 Oct 2026 · Shot Frequency 2/2 · Corner Pressure 2/2 covered regulation matches. Per-metric coverage of the four percentage shares is unavailable.

The season so far

Historical Trend

Power · 0–100

Base Power at recorded match dates. Solid lines join saved pre-match ratings; dashed segments include historical Elo backfills. The same fixed scale is used for both clubs.

Season Power historyAvailable pre-match Power observations and historical Elo backfills. Lines connect observations, not daily measurements. Exact dates and values are available in the table below. 0255075100 AC Milan · 2026-08-23 18:45:00 UTC · 61.5 · backfill AC Milan · 2026-08-28 18:45:00 UTC · 62.8 · backfill AC Milan · 2026-09-06 18:45:00 UTC · 63.1 · backfill AC Milan · 2026-09-12 16:00:00 UTC · 63.7 · backfill AC Milan · 2026-09-16 19:00:00 UTC · 64 · backfill AC Milan · 2026-09-20 18:45:00 UTC · 62 · backfill AC Milan · 2026-10-11 16:00:00 UTC · 62.7 · pre AC Milan · 2026-10-15 16:45:00 UTC · 62.4 · pre AC Milan · 2026-10-18 16:00:00 UTC · 65.2 · pre Ferencvarosi TC · 2026-09-17 19:00:00 UTC · 52.8 · backfill Ferencvarosi TC · 2026-10-15 19:00:00 UTC · 55.7 · pre 23 Aug 202618 Oct 2026
AC MilanFerencvarosi TC
View history data and coverage
ClubDate (UTC)PowerSource
AC Milan2026-08-23 18:45:0061.5Historical Elo backfill
AC Milan2026-08-28 18:45:0062.8Historical Elo backfill
AC Milan2026-09-06 18:45:0063.1Historical Elo backfill
AC Milan2026-09-12 16:00:0063.7Historical Elo backfill
AC Milan2026-09-16 19:00:0064.0Historical Elo backfill
AC Milan2026-09-20 18:45:0062.0Historical Elo backfill
AC Milan2026-10-11 16:00:0062.7Saved pre-match
AC Milan2026-10-15 16:45:0062.4Saved pre-match
AC Milan2026-10-18 16:00:0065.2Saved pre-match
Ferencvarosi TC2026-09-17 19:00:0052.8Historical Elo backfill
Ferencvarosi TC2026-10-15 19:00:0055.7Saved pre-match
Chances, finishing & results

Efficiency

From chances to results. Exact values share a scale within each row; colours identify the clubs.

Last 10

AC Milan
Ferencvarosi TC
ConversionGoals / shots · %
14.4% 10/10 covered
— 2/10 covered
Save RateSaves / shots on target faced · %
77.5% 9/10 covered
— 2/10 covered
Goals − xGFinishing gap · per match
+0.03 9/10 covered
— 1/10 covered
xGA − GAGoals prevented · per match
+0.16 9/10 covered
— 1/10 covered
Shot QualityObserved xG / shot
0.137 9/10 covered
— 1/10 covered
Shot VolumeShots / 90
13.2 10/10 covered
— 2/10 covered
xG / matchLeague season · fixed window
1.83 6/7 covered
— 1/2 covered
xGA / matchLeague season · fixed window
1.19 6/7 covered
— 1/2 covered
Points / gameLeague season · fixed window
2.14 7/7 league matches
— 2/2 league matches
Points vs expected · Form windowUp to 5 matches · stored pure forecasts
+1.52 5/5 Form window
— 2/5 Form window

AC Milan · Statistics before 25 Oct 2026 · Recent results W · W · D · W · L

Ferencvarosi TC · Statistics before 22 Oct 2026 · Recent results W · W

League season

AC Milan
Ferencvarosi TC
ConversionGoals / shots · %
16.3% 7/7 covered
— 2/2 covered
Save RateSaves / shots on target faced · %
75.0% 6/7 covered
— 2/2 covered
Goals − xGFinishing gap · per match
+0.34 6/7 covered
— 1/2 covered
xGA − GAGoals prevented · per match
+0.19 6/7 covered
— 1/2 covered
Shot QualityObserved xG / shot
0.132 6/7 covered
— 1/2 covered
Shot VolumeShots / 90
12.3 7/7 covered
— 2/2 covered
xG / matchLeague season · fixed window
1.83 6/7 covered
— 1/2 covered
xGA / matchLeague season · fixed window
1.19 6/7 covered
— 1/2 covered
Points / gameLeague season · fixed window
2.14 7/7 league matches
— 2/2 league matches
Points vs expected · Form windowUp to 5 matches · stored pure forecasts
+1.52 5/5 Form window
— 2/5 Form window

AC Milan · Statistics before 25 Oct 2026 · Recent results W · W · D · W · L

Ferencvarosi TC · Statistics before 22 Oct 2026 · Recent results W · W

Positive Goals − xG means more goals scored than the observed chances predicted. Positive xGA − GA means fewer goals conceded than those chances predicted; it reflects defence and goalkeeping together. Gaps are per covered match and pair goals and xG on the same matches. Shot Quality pairs total xG and total shots. Minimum three known matches per metric; missing data stays unavailable.

Butterfly bars grow from the centre towards each club. Length shows magnitude, not superiority; negative gaps use stripes and a minus sign. Percentages use 0–100%, PPG uses 0–3; other rows share the larger absolute value as their limit. xG, xGA and PPG retain their league-season window. Points vs expected retains the latest up to five completed matches with stored pure forecasts across tracked competitions; results are newest first. These observed metrics are not adjusted for league or opponent strength.

About this comparison

Strength ratings share LOAD90’s fixed scales across leagues. Elo reflects opponent quality; Attack and Defence describe performance against the same reference club on a neutral pitch. Form adjusts for opponents and venue. League Strength is not added a second time. Cross-league ratings remain model estimates; sparse connections between leagues and incomplete data limit precision. Explore the methodology →