Clubs Compare

FC Porto vs PSV Eindhoven

Real strength. Different football profiles.

FC Porto

Primeira Liga · 2026-2027

Rating as of 19 Oct 2026
Power79.9

PSV Eindhoven

Eredivisie · 2026-2027

Rating as of 19 Oct 2026
Power73.7
The football profile

Club DNA

FC PortoPSV Eindhoven

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 FC Porto · Power 79.9 ptsFC Porto · Attack 74.3 ptsFC Porto · Defence 79.4 ptsFC Porto · Form 84.0 ptsFC Porto · Consistency 64.9 ptsFC Porto · Squad Availability 84.5 % PSV Eindhoven · Power 73.7 ptsPSV Eindhoven · Attack 59.9 ptsPSV Eindhoven · Defence 64.2 ptsPSV Eindhoven · Form 31.9 ptsPSV Eindhoven · Consistency 56.6 ptsPSV Eindhoven · Squad Availability 83.4 % 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 FC Porto · Power 79.9 ptsFC Porto · Attack 74.3 ptsFC Porto · Defence 79.4 ptsFC Porto · Form 84.0 ptsFC Porto · Consistency 64.9 ptsFC Porto · Squad Availability 84.5 % PSV Eindhoven · Power 73.7 ptsPSV Eindhoven · Attack 59.9 ptsPSV Eindhoven · Defence 64.2 ptsPSV Eindhoven · Form 31.9 ptsPSV Eindhoven · Consistency 56.6 ptsPSV Eindhoven · Squad Availability 83.4 %
Ratings · 0–100 · Availability is a percentage

Strength comparison

Point gaps · Availability in percentage points

79.9Power73.7
FC Porto +6.2 pts
74.3Attack59.9
FC Porto +14.4 pts
79.4Defence64.2
FC Porto +15.2 pts
84.0Form31.9
FC Porto +52.1 pts
64.9Consistency56.6
FC Porto +8.3 pts
84.5%Squad Availability83.4%
FC Porto +1.1 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

  • FC Porto shows better recent form.
  • FC Porto holds the defensive advantage.
  • FC Porto has the stronger attacking profile.
Descriptive rating gaps, not a match forecast. Small gaps are left out; missing ratings are not compared.

FC Porto · Form 5/5 · Consistency 19/20 covered matches · 1 pre-match / 18 historical forecast backfills · Availability · last completed match 14 Oct 2026

PSV Eindhoven · Form 5/5 · Consistency 20/20 covered matches · 2 pre-match / 18 historical forecast backfills · Availability · last completed match 17 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.

FC Porto · Current gap SD 1.05 points · mean gap 0.26 · Provisional sample

PSV Eindhoven · Current gap SD 1.30 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 FC Porto · Possession 51.8 %FC Porto · Pass accuracy 84.4 %FC Porto · Shots in the box 71.7 %FC Porto · On target share 39.0 %FC Porto · Shot Frequency 3.5 shots/100 passesFC Porto · Corner Pressure 5.7 corners/90 PSV Eindhoven · Possession 58.2 %PSV Eindhoven · Pass accuracy 88.2 %PSV Eindhoven · Shots in the box 66.7 %PSV Eindhoven · On target share 37.6 %PSV Eindhoven · Shot Frequency 3.3 shots/100 passesPSV Eindhoven · Corner Pressure 6.2 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 FC Porto · Possession 51.8 %FC Porto · Pass accuracy 84.4 %FC Porto · Shots in the box 71.7 %FC Porto · On target share 39.0 %FC Porto · Shot Frequency 3.5 shots/100 passesFC Porto · Corner Pressure 5.7 corners/90 PSV Eindhoven · Possession 58.2 %PSV Eindhoven · Pass accuracy 88.2 %PSV Eindhoven · Shots in the box 66.7 %PSV Eindhoven · On target share 37.6 %PSV Eindhoven · Shot Frequency 3.3 shots/100 passesPSV Eindhoven · Corner Pressure 6.2 corners/90
Native units · axis ranges shown · larger is not better

How they play

Differences in each metric’s native units

51.8%Possession58.2%
PSV Eindhoven +6.4 pp
84.4%Pass accuracy88.2%
PSV Eindhoven +3.8 pp
71.7%Shots in the box66.7%
FC Porto +5.1 pp
39.0%On target share37.6%
FC Porto +1.4 pp
3.5Shot Frequency3.3
FC Porto +0.2 shots/100 passes
5.7Corner Pressure6.2
PSV Eindhoven +0.5 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.

FC Porto · Window 10 matches · before 24 Oct 2026 · Shot Frequency 10/10 · Corner Pressure 10/10 covered regulation matches. Per-metric coverage of the four percentage shares is unavailable.

PSV Eindhoven · 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.

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 FC Porto · Power 78.6 ptsFC Porto · Form 87.5 ptsFC Porto · Consistency 66.1 pts PSV Eindhoven · Power 76.9 ptsPSV Eindhoven · Form 71.6 ptsPSV Eindhoven · Consistency 59.3 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 FC Porto · Power 78.6 ptsFC Porto · Form 87.5 ptsFC Porto · Consistency 66.1 pts PSV Eindhoven · Power 76.9 ptsPSV Eindhoven · Form 71.6 ptsPSV Eindhoven · Consistency 59.3 pts
Ratings · 0–100 · Availability is a percentage

Strength comparison

Point gaps · Availability in percentage points

78.6Power76.9
FC Porto +1.7 pts
—Attack—
Shared data unavailable
—Defence—
Shared data unavailable
87.5Form71.6
FC Porto +15.9 pts
66.1Consistency59.3
FC Porto +6.8 pts
—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

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

FC Porto · Power 9 · Attack 1 · Defence 1 · Form 6 · Consistency 9 · Squad Availability 1 · 1 pre-match / 8 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.

PSV Eindhoven · Power 11 · Attack 2 · Defence 2 · Form 8 · Consistency 11 · Squad Availability 2 · 2 pre-match / 9 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.

FC Porto · Current gap SD 1.05 points · mean gap 0.26 · Provisional sample

PSV Eindhoven · Current gap SD 1.30 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 FC Porto · Possession 54.8 %FC Porto · Pass accuracy 85.1 %FC Porto · Shots in the box 70.8 %FC Porto · On target share 40.0 %FC Porto · Shot Frequency 3.8 shots/100 passesFC Porto · Corner Pressure 6.8 corners/90 PSV Eindhoven · Possession 60.8 %PSV Eindhoven · Pass accuracy 88.6 %PSV Eindhoven · Shots in the box 71.1 %PSV Eindhoven · On target share 36.6 %PSV Eindhoven · Shot Frequency 3.4 shots/100 passesPSV Eindhoven · Corner Pressure 6.6 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 FC Porto · Possession 54.8 %FC Porto · Pass accuracy 85.1 %FC Porto · Shots in the box 70.8 %FC Porto · On target share 40.0 %FC Porto · Shot Frequency 3.8 shots/100 passesFC Porto · Corner Pressure 6.8 corners/90 PSV Eindhoven · Possession 60.8 %PSV Eindhoven · Pass accuracy 88.6 %PSV Eindhoven · Shots in the box 71.1 %PSV Eindhoven · On target share 36.6 %PSV Eindhoven · Shot Frequency 3.4 shots/100 passesPSV Eindhoven · Corner Pressure 6.6 corners/90
Native units · axis ranges shown · larger is not better

How they play

Differences in each metric’s native units

54.8%Possession60.8%
PSV Eindhoven +6.0 pp
85.1%Pass accuracy88.6%
PSV Eindhoven +3.5 pp
70.8%Shots in the box71.1%
PSV Eindhoven +0.3 pp
40.0%On target share36.6%
FC Porto +3.4 pp
3.8Shot Frequency3.4
FC Porto +0.4 shots/100 passes
6.8Corner Pressure6.6
FC Porto +0.2 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.

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

PSV Eindhoven · Window 9 matches · before 25 Oct 2026 · Shot Frequency 9/9 · Corner Pressure 9/9 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 FC Porto · 2026-08-09 17:00:00 UTC · 76.8 · backfill FC Porto · 2026-08-15 19:30:00 UTC · 77 · backfill FC Porto · 2026-08-23 19:30:00 UTC · 77.6 · backfill FC Porto · 2026-08-29 17:00:00 UTC · 77.9 · backfill FC Porto · 2026-09-04 19:15:00 UTC · 78.7 · backfill FC Porto · 2026-09-12 17:00:00 UTC · 78.9 · backfill FC Porto · 2026-09-20 19:30:00 UTC · 79.4 · backfill FC Porto · 2026-10-10 17:00:00 UTC · 80.6 · backfill FC Porto · 2026-10-14 19:00:00 UTC · 80.8 · pre PSV Eindhoven · 2026-08-08 18:00:00 UTC · 76.3 · backfill PSV Eindhoven · 2026-08-15 18:00:00 UTC · 75.2 · backfill PSV Eindhoven · 2026-08-23 12:30:00 UTC · 75.7 · backfill PSV Eindhoven · 2026-08-30 10:15:00 UTC · 76.1 · backfill PSV Eindhoven · 2026-09-05 18:00:00 UTC · 77.5 · backfill PSV Eindhoven · 2026-09-10 16:45:00 UTC · 78.8 · backfill PSV Eindhoven · 2026-09-13 18:00:00 UTC · 78 · backfill PSV Eindhoven · 2026-09-20 12:30:00 UTC · 78.3 · backfill PSV Eindhoven · 2026-10-09 18:00:00 UTC · 76.7 · backfill PSV Eindhoven · 2026-10-13 19:00:00 UTC · 77 · pre PSV Eindhoven · 2026-10-17 14:30:00 UTC · 75.9 · pre 8 Aug 202617 Oct 2026
FC PortoPSV Eindhoven
View history data and coverage
ClubDate (UTC)PowerSource
FC Porto2026-08-09 17:00:0076.8Historical Elo backfill
FC Porto2026-08-15 19:30:0077.0Historical Elo backfill
FC Porto2026-08-23 19:30:0077.6Historical Elo backfill
FC Porto2026-08-29 17:00:0077.9Historical Elo backfill
FC Porto2026-09-04 19:15:0078.7Historical Elo backfill
FC Porto2026-09-12 17:00:0078.9Historical Elo backfill
FC Porto2026-09-20 19:30:0079.4Historical Elo backfill
FC Porto2026-10-10 17:00:0080.6Historical Elo backfill
FC Porto2026-10-14 19:00:0080.8Saved pre-match
PSV Eindhoven2026-08-08 18:00:0076.3Historical Elo backfill
PSV Eindhoven2026-08-15 18:00:0075.2Historical Elo backfill
PSV Eindhoven2026-08-23 12:30:0075.7Historical Elo backfill
PSV Eindhoven2026-08-30 10:15:0076.1Historical Elo backfill
PSV Eindhoven2026-09-05 18:00:0077.5Historical Elo backfill
PSV Eindhoven2026-09-10 16:45:0078.8Historical Elo backfill
PSV Eindhoven2026-09-13 18:00:0078.0Historical Elo backfill
PSV Eindhoven2026-09-20 12:30:0078.3Historical Elo backfill
PSV Eindhoven2026-10-09 18:00:0076.7Historical Elo backfill
PSV Eindhoven2026-10-13 19:00:0077.0Saved pre-match
PSV Eindhoven2026-10-17 14:30:0075.9Saved pre-match
Chances, finishing & results

Efficiency

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

Last 10

FC Porto
PSV Eindhoven
ConversionGoals / shots · %
15.1% 10/10 covered
15.0% 10/10 covered
Save RateSaves / shots on target faced · %
74.4% 10/10 covered
70.7% 9/10 covered
Goals − xGFinishing gap · per match
+0.10 7/10 covered
+0.39 6/10 covered
xGA − GAGoals prevented · per match
+0.27 7/10 covered
+0.11 6/10 covered
Shot QualityObserved xG / shot
0.143 7/10 covered
0.122 6/10 covered
Shot VolumeShots / 90
14.6 10/10 covered
17.3 10/10 covered
xG / matchLeague season · fixed window
2.24 5/8 covered
2.43 6/9 covered
xGA / matchLeague season · fixed window
0.78 5/8 covered
0.91 6/9 covered
Points / gameLeague season · fixed window
3.00 8/8 league matches
2.11 9/9 league matches
Points vs expected · Form windowUp to 5 matches · stored pure forecasts
+1.95 5/5 Form window
-4.65 5/5 Form window

FC Porto · Statistics before 24 Oct 2026 · Recent results L · W · W · W · W

PSV Eindhoven · Statistics before 25 Oct 2026 · Recent results L · L · W · L · W

League season

FC Porto
PSV Eindhoven
ConversionGoals / shots · %
15.4% 8/8 covered
15.4% 9/9 covered
Save RateSaves / shots on target faced · %
77.3% 8/8 covered
66.7% 8/9 covered
Goals − xGFinishing gap · per match
-0.04 5/8 covered
+0.57 6/9 covered
xGA − GAGoals prevented · per match
+0.58 5/8 covered
-0.26 6/9 covered
Shot QualityObserved xG / shot
0.160 5/8 covered
0.118 6/9 covered
Shot VolumeShots / 90
16.3 8/8 covered
19.4 9/9 covered
xG / matchLeague season · fixed window
2.24 5/8 covered
2.43 6/9 covered
xGA / matchLeague season · fixed window
0.78 5/8 covered
0.91 6/9 covered
Points / gameLeague season · fixed window
3.00 8/8 league matches
2.11 9/9 league matches
Points vs expected · Form windowUp to 5 matches · stored pure forecasts
+1.95 5/5 Form window
-4.65 5/5 Form window

FC Porto · Statistics before 24 Oct 2026 · Recent results L · W · W · W · W

PSV Eindhoven · Statistics before 25 Oct 2026 · Recent results L · L · W · L · 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 →