Clubs Compare

Kortrijk vs Lommel United

Real strength. Different football profiles.

Kortrijk

Belgian Pro League · 2026-2027

Rating as of 20 Oct 2026
Power11.6

Lommel United

Belgian Pro League · 2026-2027

Rating as of 20 Oct 2026
Power36.4
The football profile

Club DNA

KortrijkLommel United

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 Kortrijk · Power 11.6 ptsKortrijk · Attack 9.7 ptsKortrijk · Defence 16.0 ptsKortrijk · Form 13.4 pts Lommel United · Power 36.4 ptsLommel United · Attack 32.2 ptsLommel United · Defence 41.4 ptsLommel United · Form 47.2 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 Kortrijk · Power 11.6 ptsKortrijk · Attack 9.7 ptsKortrijk · Defence 16.0 ptsKortrijk · Form 13.4 pts Lommel United · Power 36.4 ptsLommel United · Attack 32.2 ptsLommel United · Defence 41.4 ptsLommel United · Form 47.2 pts
Ratings · 0–100 · Availability is a percentage

Strength comparison

Point gaps · Availability in percentage points

11.6Power36.4
Lommel United +24.8 pts
9.7Attack32.2
Lommel United +22.5 pts
16.0Defence41.4
Lommel United +25.4 pts
13.4Form47.2
Lommel United +33.8 pts
—Consistency—
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

  • Lommel United shows better recent form.
  • Lommel United holds the defensive advantage.
  • Lommel United has the higher Power rating.
Descriptive rating gaps, not a match forecast. Small gaps are left out; missing ratings are not compared.

Kortrijk · Form 5/5 · Consistency 8/8 covered matches · 0 pre-match / 8 historical forecast backfills · Availability · last completed match 10 Oct 2026

Lommel United · Form 5/5 · Consistency 8/8 covered matches · 0 pre-match / 8 historical forecast backfills · Availability · last completed match 9 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.

Kortrijk · Current gap SD 0.90 points · mean gap -0.43 · Insufficient sample

Lommel United · Current gap SD 1.21 points · mean gap 0.07 · 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 Kortrijk · Possession 42.7 %Kortrijk · Pass accuracy 77.7 %Kortrijk · Shots in the box 59.5 %Kortrijk · On target share 25.0 %Kortrijk · Shot Frequency 2.7 shots/100 passesKortrijk · Corner Pressure 3.7 corners/90 Lommel United · Possession 44.7 %Lommel United · Pass accuracy 82.0 %Lommel United · Shots in the box 65.8 %Lommel United · On target share 28.6 %Lommel United · Shot Frequency 2.6 shots/100 passesLommel United · Corner Pressure 3.6 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 Kortrijk · Possession 42.7 %Kortrijk · Pass accuracy 77.7 %Kortrijk · Shots in the box 59.5 %Kortrijk · On target share 25.0 %Kortrijk · Shot Frequency 2.7 shots/100 passesKortrijk · Corner Pressure 3.7 corners/90 Lommel United · Possession 44.7 %Lommel United · Pass accuracy 82.0 %Lommel United · Shots in the box 65.8 %Lommel United · On target share 28.6 %Lommel United · Shot Frequency 2.6 shots/100 passesLommel United · Corner Pressure 3.6 corners/90
Native units · axis ranges shown · larger is not better

How they play

Differences in each metric’s native units

42.7%Possession44.7%
Lommel United +2.0 pp
77.7%Pass accuracy82.0%
Lommel United +4.3 pp
59.5%Shots in the box65.8%
Lommel United +6.3 pp
25.0%On target share28.6%
Lommel United +3.6 pp
2.7Shot Frequency2.6
Kortrijk +0.1 shots/100 passes
3.7Corner Pressure3.6
Kortrijk +0.1 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.

Kortrijk · Window 10 matches · before 23 Oct 2026 · Shot Frequency 10/10 · Corner Pressure 10/10 covered regulation matches. Per-metric coverage of the four percentage shares is unavailable.

Lommel United · 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.

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 Kortrijk · Power 12.9 ptsKortrijk · Form 9.7 pts Lommel United · Power 35.0 ptsLommel United · Form 42.0 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 Kortrijk · Power 12.9 ptsKortrijk · Form 9.7 pts Lommel United · Power 35.0 ptsLommel United · Form 42.0 pts
Ratings · 0–100 · Availability is a percentage

Strength comparison

Point gaps · Availability in percentage points

12.9Power35.0
Lommel United +22.1 pts
—Attack—
Shared data unavailable
—Defence—
Shared data unavailable
9.7Form42.0
Lommel United +32.3 pts
—Consistency—
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

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

Kortrijk · Power 8 · Attack 0 · Defence 0 · Form 5 · Consistency 0 · 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.

Lommel United · Power 8 · Attack 0 · Defence 0 · Form 5 · Consistency 0 · 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.

Kortrijk · Current gap SD 0.90 points · mean gap -0.43 · Insufficient sample

Lommel United · Current gap SD 1.21 points · mean gap 0.07 · 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 Kortrijk · Possession 44.3 %Kortrijk · Pass accuracy 79.3 %Kortrijk · Shots in the box 59.2 %Kortrijk · On target share 23.3 %Kortrijk · Shot Frequency 2.8 shots/100 passesKortrijk · Corner Pressure 3.5 corners/90 Lommel United · Possession 43.5 %Lommel United · Pass accuracy 83.3 %Lommel United · Shots in the box 66.0 %Lommel United · On target share 27.9 %Lommel United · Shot Frequency 2.6 shots/100 passesLommel United · Corner Pressure 3.5 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 Kortrijk · Possession 44.3 %Kortrijk · Pass accuracy 79.3 %Kortrijk · Shots in the box 59.2 %Kortrijk · On target share 23.3 %Kortrijk · Shot Frequency 2.8 shots/100 passesKortrijk · Corner Pressure 3.5 corners/90 Lommel United · Possession 43.5 %Lommel United · Pass accuracy 83.3 %Lommel United · Shots in the box 66.0 %Lommel United · On target share 27.9 %Lommel United · Shot Frequency 2.6 shots/100 passesLommel United · Corner Pressure 3.5 corners/90
Native units · axis ranges shown · larger is not better

How they play

Differences in each metric’s native units

44.3%Possession43.5%
Kortrijk +0.8 pp
79.3%Pass accuracy83.3%
Lommel United +4.0 pp
59.2%Shots in the box66.0%
Lommel United +6.7 pp
23.3%On target share27.9%
Lommel United +4.6 pp
2.8Shot Frequency2.6
Kortrijk +0.2 shots/100 passes
3.5Corner Pressure3.5
Level

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.

Kortrijk · Window 8 matches · before 23 Oct 2026 · Shot Frequency 8/8 · Corner Pressure 8/8 covered regulation matches. Per-metric coverage of the four percentage shares is unavailable.

Lommel United · 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.

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 Kortrijk · 2026-08-07 18:45:00 UTC · 14.9 · backfill Kortrijk · 2026-08-15 16:15:00 UTC · 14.8 · backfill Kortrijk · 2026-08-29 16:15:00 UTC · 13.5 · backfill Kortrijk · 2026-09-03 18:30:00 UTC · 12.6 · backfill Kortrijk · 2026-09-06 14:00:00 UTC · 12.5 · backfill Kortrijk · 2026-09-13 17:15:00 UTC · 11.7 · backfill Kortrijk · 2026-09-20 17:15:00 UTC · 11.1 · backfill Kortrijk · 2026-10-10 18:45:00 UTC · 11.9 · backfill Lommel United · 2026-08-08 18:45:00 UTC · 34.9 · backfill Lommel United · 2026-08-16 17:15:00 UTC · 35.5 · backfill Lommel United · 2026-08-23 14:00:00 UTC · 33.4 · backfill Lommel United · 2026-08-29 18:45:00 UTC · 35.1 · backfill Lommel United · 2026-09-04 18:45:00 UTC · 36.8 · backfill Lommel United · 2026-09-12 18:45:00 UTC · 35.8 · backfill Lommel United · 2026-09-19 18:45:00 UTC · 34.8 · backfill Lommel United · 2026-10-09 18:45:00 UTC · 34 · backfill 7 Aug 202610 Oct 2026
KortrijkLommel United
View history data and coverage
ClubDate (UTC)PowerSource
Kortrijk2026-08-07 18:45:0014.9Historical Elo backfill
Kortrijk2026-08-15 16:15:0014.8Historical Elo backfill
Kortrijk2026-08-29 16:15:0013.5Historical Elo backfill
Kortrijk2026-09-03 18:30:0012.6Historical Elo backfill
Kortrijk2026-09-06 14:00:0012.5Historical Elo backfill
Kortrijk2026-09-13 17:15:0011.7Historical Elo backfill
Kortrijk2026-09-20 17:15:0011.1Historical Elo backfill
Kortrijk2026-10-10 18:45:0011.9Historical Elo backfill
Lommel United2026-08-08 18:45:0034.9Historical Elo backfill
Lommel United2026-08-16 17:15:0035.5Historical Elo backfill
Lommel United2026-08-23 14:00:0033.4Historical Elo backfill
Lommel United2026-08-29 18:45:0035.1Historical Elo backfill
Lommel United2026-09-04 18:45:0036.8Historical Elo backfill
Lommel United2026-09-12 18:45:0035.8Historical Elo backfill
Lommel United2026-09-19 18:45:0034.8Historical Elo backfill
Lommel United2026-10-09 18:45:0034.0Historical Elo backfill
Chances, finishing & results

Efficiency

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

Last 10

Kortrijk
Lommel United
ConversionGoals / shots · %
2.9% 10/10 covered
11.4% 10/10 covered
Save RateSaves / shots on target faced · %
67.3% 10/10 covered
75.0% 10/10 covered
Goals − xGFinishing gap · per match
-0.81 3/10 covered
+0.88 4/10 covered
xGA − GAGoals prevented · per match
-0.85 3/10 covered
+0.40 4/10 covered
Shot QualityObserved xG / shot
0.076 3/10 covered
0.096 4/10 covered
Shot VolumeShots / 90
10.4 10/10 covered
10.5 10/10 covered
xG / matchLeague season · fixed window
0.81 3/8 covered
1.13 4/8 covered
xGA / matchLeague season · fixed window
2.15 3/8 covered
1.15 4/8 covered
Points / gameLeague season · fixed window
0.38 8/8 league matches
1.38 8/8 league matches
Points vs expected · Form windowUp to 5 matches · stored pure forecasts
-1.13 5/5 Form window
+0.94 5/5 Form window

Kortrijk · Statistics before 23 Oct 2026 · Recent results L · W · L · L · L

Lommel United · Statistics before 24 Oct 2026 · Recent results W · D · L · L · W

League season

Kortrijk
Lommel United
ConversionGoals / shots · %
2.2% 8/8 covered
10.5% 8/8 covered
Save RateSaves / shots on target faced · %
61.9% 8/8 covered
75.7% 8/8 covered
Goals − xGFinishing gap · per match
-0.81 3/8 covered
+0.88 4/8 covered
xGA − GAGoals prevented · per match
-0.85 3/8 covered
+0.40 4/8 covered
Shot QualityObserved xG / shot
0.076 3/8 covered
0.096 4/8 covered
Shot VolumeShots / 90
11.3 8/8 covered
10.8 8/8 covered
xG / matchLeague season · fixed window
0.81 3/8 covered
1.13 4/8 covered
xGA / matchLeague season · fixed window
2.15 3/8 covered
1.15 4/8 covered
Points / gameLeague season · fixed window
0.38 8/8 league matches
1.38 8/8 league matches
Points vs expected · Form windowUp to 5 matches · stored pure forecasts
-1.13 5/5 Form window
+0.94 5/5 Form window

Kortrijk · Statistics before 23 Oct 2026 · Recent results L · W · L · L · L

Lommel United · Statistics before 24 Oct 2026 · Recent results W · D · L · 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 →