Clubs Compare

FC Porto vs Rio Ave

Real strength. Different football profiles.

FC Porto

Primeira Liga · 2026-2027

Rating as of 20 Oct 2026
Power79.9

Rio Ave

Primeira Liga · 2026-2027

Rating as of 20 Oct 2026
Power20.8
The football profile

Club DNA

FC PortoRio Ave

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 79.5 ptsFC Porto · Form 84.0 ptsFC Porto · Consistency 64.9 ptsFC Porto · Squad Availability 84.5 % Rio Ave · Power 20.8 ptsRio Ave · Attack 18.3 ptsRio Ave · Defence 21.0 ptsRio Ave · Form 17.1 ptsRio Ave · Consistency 61.0 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 79.9 ptsFC Porto · Attack 74.3 ptsFC Porto · Defence 79.5 ptsFC Porto · Form 84.0 ptsFC Porto · Consistency 64.9 ptsFC Porto · Squad Availability 84.5 % Rio Ave · Power 20.8 ptsRio Ave · Attack 18.3 ptsRio Ave · Defence 21.0 ptsRio Ave · Form 17.1 ptsRio Ave · Consistency 61.0 pts
Ratings · 0–100 · Availability is a percentage

Strength comparison

Point gaps · Availability in percentage points

79.9Power20.8
FC Porto +59.1 pts
74.3Attack18.3
FC Porto +56.0 pts
79.5Defence21.0
FC Porto +58.5 pts
84.0Form17.1
FC Porto +66.9 pts
64.9Consistency61.0
FC Porto +3.9 pts
84.5%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 shows better recent form.
  • FC Porto has the higher Power rating.
  • FC Porto holds the defensive advantage.
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

Rio Ave · Form 5/5 · Consistency 20/20 covered matches · 0 pre-match / 20 historical forecast backfills · Availability · last completed match 11 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

Rio Ave · Current gap SD 1.17 points · mean gap 0.02 · 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 Rio Ave · Possession 45.0 %Rio Ave · Pass accuracy 82.4 %Rio Ave · Shots in the box 42.3 %Rio Ave · On target share 39.2 %Rio Ave · Shot Frequency 2.2 shots/100 passesRio Ave · Corner Pressure 3.9 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 Rio Ave · Possession 45.0 %Rio Ave · Pass accuracy 82.4 %Rio Ave · Shots in the box 42.3 %Rio Ave · On target share 39.2 %Rio Ave · Shot Frequency 2.2 shots/100 passesRio Ave · Corner Pressure 3.9 corners/90
Native units · axis ranges shown · larger is not better

How they play

Differences in each metric’s native units

51.8%Possession45.0%
FC Porto +6.8 pp
84.4%Pass accuracy82.4%
FC Porto +2.0 pp
71.7%Shots in the box42.3%
FC Porto +29.4 pp
39.0%On target share39.2%
Rio Ave +0.2 pp
3.5Shot Frequency2.2
FC Porto +1.3 shots/100 passes
5.7Corner Pressure3.9
FC Porto +1.8 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.

Rio Ave · Window 10 matches · before 25 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 FC Porto · Power 78.6 ptsFC Porto · Form 87.5 ptsFC Porto · Consistency 66.1 pts Rio Ave · Power 21.4 ptsRio Ave · Form 27.5 ptsRio Ave · Consistency 60.9 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 Rio Ave · Power 21.4 ptsRio Ave · Form 27.5 ptsRio Ave · Consistency 60.9 pts
Ratings · 0–100 · Availability is a percentage

Strength comparison

Point gaps · Availability in percentage points

78.6Power21.4
FC Porto +57.2 pts
—Attack—
Shared data unavailable
—Defence—
Shared data unavailable
87.5Form27.5
FC Porto +60.0 pts
66.1Consistency60.9
FC Porto +5.2 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 Power 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.

Rio Ave · Power 8 · Attack 0 · Defence 0 · Form 5 · Consistency 8 · Squad Availability 0 · 0 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.

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

Rio Ave · Current gap SD 1.17 points · mean gap 0.02 · 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 Rio Ave · Possession 44.6 %Rio Ave · Pass accuracy 82.6 %Rio Ave · Shots in the box 39.0 %Rio Ave · On target share 41.0 %Rio Ave · Shot Frequency 2.1 shots/100 passesRio Ave · Corner Pressure 3.8 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 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 Rio Ave · Possession 44.6 %Rio Ave · Pass accuracy 82.6 %Rio Ave · Shots in the box 39.0 %Rio Ave · On target share 41.0 %Rio Ave · Shot Frequency 2.1 shots/100 passesRio Ave · Corner Pressure 3.8 corners/90
Native units · axis ranges shown · larger is not better

How they play

Differences in each metric’s native units

54.8%Possession44.6%
FC Porto +10.1 pp
85.1%Pass accuracy82.6%
FC Porto +2.5 pp
70.8%Shots in the box39.0%
FC Porto +31.8 pp
40.0%On target share41.0%
Rio Ave +1.0 pp
3.8Shot Frequency2.1
FC Porto +1.7 shots/100 passes
6.8Corner Pressure3.8
FC Porto +3.0 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.

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.

Rio Ave · Window 8 matches · before 25 Oct 2026 · Shot Frequency 8/8 · Corner Pressure 8/8 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 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 Rio Ave · 2026-08-09 19:30:00 UTC · 22 · backfill Rio Ave · 2026-08-15 19:30:00 UTC · 21.3 · backfill Rio Ave · 2026-08-22 17:00:00 UTC · 20.8 · backfill Rio Ave · 2026-08-28 19:15:00 UTC · 23.1 · backfill Rio Ave · 2026-09-06 14:30:00 UTC · 22.4 · backfill Rio Ave · 2026-09-14 17:45:00 UTC · 21 · backfill Rio Ave · 2026-09-19 17:00:00 UTC · 20.7 · backfill Rio Ave · 2026-10-11 14:30:00 UTC · 20.1 · backfill 9 Aug 202614 Oct 2026
FC PortoRio Ave
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
Rio Ave2026-08-09 19:30:0022.0Historical Elo backfill
Rio Ave2026-08-15 19:30:0021.3Historical Elo backfill
Rio Ave2026-08-22 17:00:0020.8Historical Elo backfill
Rio Ave2026-08-28 19:15:0023.1Historical Elo backfill
Rio Ave2026-09-06 14:30:0022.4Historical Elo backfill
Rio Ave2026-09-14 17:45:0021.0Historical Elo backfill
Rio Ave2026-09-19 17:00:0020.7Historical Elo backfill
Rio Ave2026-10-11 14:30:0020.1Historical Elo backfill
Chances, finishing & results

Efficiency

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

Last 10

FC Porto
Rio Ave
ConversionGoals / shots · %
15.1% 10/10 covered
12.7% 10/10 covered
Save RateSaves / shots on target faced · %
74.4% 10/10 covered
62.5% 10/10 covered
Goals − xGFinishing gap · per match
+0.10 7/10 covered
+0.27 7/10 covered
xGA − GAGoals prevented · per match
+0.27 7/10 covered
-0.35 7/10 covered
Shot QualityObserved xG / shot
0.143 7/10 covered
0.089 7/10 covered
Shot VolumeShots / 90
14.6 10/10 covered
7.9 10/10 covered
xG / matchLeague season · fixed window
2.24 5/8 covered
0.75 5/8 covered
xGA / matchLeague season · fixed window
0.78 5/8 covered
1.55 5/8 covered
Points / gameLeague season · fixed window
3.00 8/8 league matches
0.88 8/8 league matches
Points vs expected · Form windowUp to 5 matches · stored pure forecasts
+1.95 5/5 Form window
-1.60 5/5 Form window

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

Rio Ave · Statistics before 25 Oct 2026 · Recent results W · L · D · L · L

League season

FC Porto
Rio Ave
ConversionGoals / shots · %
15.4% 8/8 covered
13.1% 8/8 covered
Save RateSaves / shots on target faced · %
77.3% 8/8 covered
61.7% 8/8 covered
Goals − xGFinishing gap · per match
-0.04 5/8 covered
+0.25 5/8 covered
xGA − GAGoals prevented · per match
+0.58 5/8 covered
-0.25 5/8 covered
Shot QualityObserved xG / shot
0.160 5/8 covered
0.097 5/8 covered
Shot VolumeShots / 90
16.3 8/8 covered
7.6 8/8 covered
xG / matchLeague season · fixed window
2.24 5/8 covered
0.75 5/8 covered
xGA / matchLeague season · fixed window
0.78 5/8 covered
1.55 5/8 covered
Points / gameLeague season · fixed window
3.00 8/8 league matches
0.88 8/8 league matches
Points vs expected · Form windowUp to 5 matches · stored pure forecasts
+1.95 5/5 Form window
-1.60 5/5 Form window

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

Rio Ave · Statistics before 25 Oct 2026 · Recent results W · L · D · L · 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 →