Clubs Compare

Erzurumspor FK vs Rizespor

Real strength. Different football profiles.

Erzurumspor FK

Süper Lig · 2026-2027

Rating as of 20 Oct 2026
Power26.5

Rizespor

Süper Lig · 2026-2027

Rating as of 20 Oct 2026
Power22.0
The football profile

Club DNA

Erzurumspor FKRizespor

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 Erzurumspor FK · Power 26.5 ptsErzurumspor FK · Attack 16.6 ptsErzurumspor FK · Defence 37.5 ptsErzurumspor FK · Form 56.4 ptsErzurumspor FK · Squad Availability 100.0 % Rizespor · Power 22.0 ptsRizespor · Attack 21.7 ptsRizespor · Defence 35.4 ptsRizespor · Form 17.4 ptsRizespor · Consistency 55.1 ptsRizespor · Squad Availability 100.0 % 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 Erzurumspor FK · Power 26.5 ptsErzurumspor FK · Attack 16.6 ptsErzurumspor FK · Defence 37.5 ptsErzurumspor FK · Form 56.4 ptsErzurumspor FK · Squad Availability 100.0 % Rizespor · Power 22.0 ptsRizespor · Attack 21.7 ptsRizespor · Defence 35.4 ptsRizespor · Form 17.4 ptsRizespor · Consistency 55.1 ptsRizespor · Squad Availability 100.0 %
Ratings · 0–100 · Availability is a percentage

Strength comparison

Point gaps · Availability in percentage points

26.5Power22.0
Erzurumspor FK +4.5 pts
16.6Attack21.7
Rizespor +5.1 pts
37.5Defence35.4
Erzurumspor FK +2.1 pts
56.4Form17.4
Erzurumspor FK +39.0 pts
—Consistency55.1
Shared data unavailable
100.0%Squad Availability100.0%
Level

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

  • Erzurumspor FK shows better recent form.
  • Rizespor has the stronger attacking profile.
  • Erzurumspor FK has the higher Power rating.
Descriptive rating gaps, not a match forecast. Small gaps are left out; missing ratings are not compared.

Erzurumspor FK · Form 5/5 · Consistency 8/8 covered matches · 1 pre-match / 7 historical forecast backfills · Availability · last completed match 17 Oct 2026

Rizespor · Form 5/5 · Consistency 20/20 covered matches · 1 pre-match / 19 historical forecast backfills · Availability · last completed match 16 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.

Erzurumspor FK · Current gap SD 0.92 points · mean gap 0.07 · Insufficient sample

Rizespor · Current gap SD 1.35 points · mean gap 0.16 · Full window

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 Erzurumspor FK · Possession 45.7 %Erzurumspor FK · Pass accuracy 83.3 %Erzurumspor FK · Shots in the box 63.2 %Erzurumspor FK · On target share 34.8 %Erzurumspor FK · Shot Frequency 2.3 shots/100 passesErzurumspor FK · Corner Pressure 3.4 corners/90 Rizespor · Possession 54.0 %Rizespor · Pass accuracy 84.9 %Rizespor · Shots in the box 59.0 %Rizespor · On target share 30.3 %Rizespor · Shot Frequency 3.6 shots/100 passesRizespor · Corner Pressure 5.8 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 Erzurumspor FK · Possession 45.7 %Erzurumspor FK · Pass accuracy 83.3 %Erzurumspor FK · Shots in the box 63.2 %Erzurumspor FK · On target share 34.8 %Erzurumspor FK · Shot Frequency 2.3 shots/100 passesErzurumspor FK · Corner Pressure 3.4 corners/90 Rizespor · Possession 54.0 %Rizespor · Pass accuracy 84.9 %Rizespor · Shots in the box 59.0 %Rizespor · On target share 30.3 %Rizespor · Shot Frequency 3.6 shots/100 passesRizespor · Corner Pressure 5.8 corners/90
Native units · axis ranges shown · larger is not better

How they play

Differences in each metric’s native units

45.7%Possession54.0%
Rizespor +8.3 pp
83.3%Pass accuracy84.9%
Rizespor +1.6 pp
63.2%Shots in the box59.0%
Erzurumspor FK +4.2 pp
34.8%On target share30.3%
Erzurumspor FK +4.5 pp
2.3Shot Frequency3.6
Rizespor +1.3 shots/100 passes
3.4Corner Pressure5.8
Rizespor +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.

Erzurumspor FK · Window 8 matches · before 24 Oct 2026 · Shot Frequency 7/8 · Corner Pressure 7/8 covered regulation matches. Per-metric coverage of the four percentage shares is unavailable.

Rizespor · Window 10 matches · before 26 Oct 2026 · Shot Frequency 10/10 · Corner Pressure 9/10 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 Erzurumspor FK · Power 25.3 ptsErzurumspor FK · Form 29.4 pts Rizespor · Power 22.7 ptsRizespor · Form 41.2 ptsRizespor · Consistency 58.5 pts 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 Erzurumspor FK · Power 25.3 ptsErzurumspor FK · Form 29.4 pts Rizespor · Power 22.7 ptsRizespor · Form 41.2 ptsRizespor · Consistency 58.5 pts
Ratings · 0–100 · Availability is a percentage

Strength comparison

Point gaps · Availability in percentage points

25.3Power22.7
Erzurumspor FK +2.6 pts
—Attack—
Shared data unavailable
—Defence—
Shared data unavailable
29.4Form41.2
Rizespor +11.8 pts
—Consistency58.5
Shared data unavailable
—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

  • Rizespor has the higher average Form value.
Descriptive rating gaps, not a match forecast. Small gaps are left out; missing ratings are not compared.

Erzurumspor FK · Power 8 · Attack 1 · Defence 1 · Form 5 · Consistency 0 · Squad Availability 1 · 1 pre-match / 7 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.

Rizespor · Power 8 · Attack 1 · Defence 1 · Form 5 · Consistency 8 · Squad Availability 1 · 1 pre-match / 7 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.

Erzurumspor FK · Current gap SD 0.92 points · mean gap 0.07 · Insufficient sample

Rizespor · Current gap SD 1.35 points · mean gap 0.16 · Full window

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 Erzurumspor FK · Possession 45.7 %Erzurumspor FK · Pass accuracy 83.3 %Erzurumspor FK · Shots in the box 63.2 %Erzurumspor FK · On target share 34.8 %Erzurumspor FK · Shot Frequency 2.3 shots/100 passesErzurumspor FK · Corner Pressure 3.4 corners/90 Rizespor · Possession 54.0 %Rizespor · Pass accuracy 84.6 %Rizespor · Shots in the box 57.4 %Rizespor · On target share 31.7 %Rizespor · Shot Frequency 3.5 shots/100 passesRizespor · Corner Pressure 5.4 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 Erzurumspor FK · Possession 45.7 %Erzurumspor FK · Pass accuracy 83.3 %Erzurumspor FK · Shots in the box 63.2 %Erzurumspor FK · On target share 34.8 %Erzurumspor FK · Shot Frequency 2.3 shots/100 passesErzurumspor FK · Corner Pressure 3.4 corners/90 Rizespor · Possession 54.0 %Rizespor · Pass accuracy 84.6 %Rizespor · Shots in the box 57.4 %Rizespor · On target share 31.7 %Rizespor · Shot Frequency 3.5 shots/100 passesRizespor · Corner Pressure 5.4 corners/90
Native units · axis ranges shown · larger is not better

How they play

Differences in each metric’s native units

45.7%Possession54.0%
Rizespor +8.3 pp
83.3%Pass accuracy84.6%
Rizespor +1.3 pp
63.2%Shots in the box57.4%
Erzurumspor FK +5.8 pp
34.8%On target share31.7%
Erzurumspor FK +3.1 pp
2.3Shot Frequency3.5
Rizespor +1.2 shots/100 passes
3.4Corner Pressure5.4
Rizespor +2.0 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.

Erzurumspor FK · Window 8 matches · before 24 Oct 2026 · Shot Frequency 7/8 · Corner Pressure 7/8 covered regulation matches. Per-metric coverage of the four percentage shares is unavailable.

Rizespor · Window 8 matches · before 26 Oct 2026 · Shot Frequency 8/8 · Corner Pressure 7/8 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 Erzurumspor FK · 2026-08-16 18:30:00 UTC · 27.4 · backfill Erzurumspor FK · 2026-08-21 18:30:00 UTC · 25.8 · backfill Erzurumspor FK · 2026-08-28 18:30:00 UTC · 24.3 · backfill Erzurumspor FK · 2026-09-05 14:00:00 UTC · 24.5 · backfill Erzurumspor FK · 2026-09-11 17:00:00 UTC · 25.2 · backfill Erzurumspor FK · 2026-09-20 14:00:00 UTC · 24.4 · backfill Erzurumspor FK · 2026-10-10 13:00:00 UTC · 25.4 · backfill Erzurumspor FK · 2026-10-17 10:30:00 UTC · 25.7 · pre Rizespor · 2026-08-15 16:00:00 UTC · 22 · backfill Rizespor · 2026-08-22 16:00:00 UTC · 23.5 · backfill Rizespor · 2026-08-29 18:30:00 UTC · 21.7 · backfill Rizespor · 2026-09-07 17:00:00 UTC · 23 · backfill Rizespor · 2026-09-12 14:00:00 UTC · 21.5 · backfill Rizespor · 2026-09-20 17:00:00 UTC · 23.4 · backfill Rizespor · 2026-10-10 16:00:00 UTC · 23.8 · backfill Rizespor · 2026-10-16 17:00:00 UTC · 22.6 · pre 15 Aug 202617 Oct 2026
Erzurumspor FKRizespor
View history data and coverage
ClubDate (UTC)PowerSource
Erzurumspor FK2026-08-16 18:30:0027.4Historical Elo backfill
Erzurumspor FK2026-08-21 18:30:0025.8Historical Elo backfill
Erzurumspor FK2026-08-28 18:30:0024.3Historical Elo backfill
Erzurumspor FK2026-09-05 14:00:0024.5Historical Elo backfill
Erzurumspor FK2026-09-11 17:00:0025.2Historical Elo backfill
Erzurumspor FK2026-09-20 14:00:0024.4Historical Elo backfill
Erzurumspor FK2026-10-10 13:00:0025.4Historical Elo backfill
Erzurumspor FK2026-10-17 10:30:0025.7Saved pre-match
Rizespor2026-08-15 16:00:0022.0Historical Elo backfill
Rizespor2026-08-22 16:00:0023.5Historical Elo backfill
Rizespor2026-08-29 18:30:0021.7Historical Elo backfill
Rizespor2026-09-07 17:00:0023.0Historical Elo backfill
Rizespor2026-09-12 14:00:0021.5Historical Elo backfill
Rizespor2026-09-20 17:00:0023.4Historical Elo backfill
Rizespor2026-10-10 16:00:0023.8Historical Elo backfill
Rizespor2026-10-16 17:00:0022.6Saved pre-match
Chances, finishing & results

Efficiency

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

Last 10

Erzurumspor FK
Rizespor
ConversionGoals / shots · %
7.6% 7/8 covered
6.5% 10/10 covered
Save RateSaves / shots on target faced · %
75.0% 6/8 covered
70.8% 10/10 covered
Goals − xGFinishing gap · per match
-0.15 6/8 covered
-0.25 9/10 covered
xGA − GAGoals prevented · per match
-0.23 6/8 covered
-0.74 9/10 covered
Shot QualityObserved xG / shot
0.091 6/8 covered
0.091 9/10 covered
Shot VolumeShots / 90
9.4 7/8 covered
15.5 10/10 covered
xG / matchLeague season · fixed window
0.82 6/8 covered
1.27 7/8 covered
xGA / matchLeague season · fixed window
1.10 6/8 covered
0.90 7/8 covered
Points / gameLeague season · fixed window
1.38 8/8 league matches
1.25 8/8 league matches
Points vs expected · Form windowUp to 5 matches · stored pure forecasts
+2.69 5/5 Form window
-2.45 5/5 Form window

Erzurumspor FK · Statistics before 24 Oct 2026 · Recent results W · D · W · L · W

Rizespor · Statistics before 26 Oct 2026 · Recent results L · L · D · W · L

League season

Erzurumspor FK
Rizespor
ConversionGoals / shots · %
7.6% 7/8 covered
6.7% 8/8 covered
Save RateSaves / shots on target faced · %
75.0% 6/8 covered
73.5% 8/8 covered
Goals − xGFinishing gap · per match
-0.15 6/8 covered
-0.13 7/8 covered
xGA − GAGoals prevented · per match
-0.23 6/8 covered
-0.53 7/8 covered
Shot QualityObserved xG / shot
0.091 6/8 covered
0.089 7/8 covered
Shot VolumeShots / 90
9.4 7/8 covered
15.0 8/8 covered
xG / matchLeague season · fixed window
0.82 6/8 covered
1.27 7/8 covered
xGA / matchLeague season · fixed window
1.10 6/8 covered
0.90 7/8 covered
Points / gameLeague season · fixed window
1.38 8/8 league matches
1.25 8/8 league matches
Points vs expected · Form windowUp to 5 matches · stored pure forecasts
+2.69 5/5 Form window
-2.45 5/5 Form window

Erzurumspor FK · Statistics before 24 Oct 2026 · Recent results W · D · W · L · W

Rizespor · Statistics before 26 Oct 2026 · Recent results L · L · D · W · L

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 →