Clubs Compare

RB Leipzig vs Werder Bremen

Real strength. Different football profiles.

RB Leipzig

Bundesliga · 2026-2027

Rating as of 20 Oct 2026
Power68.1

Werder Bremen

Bundesliga · 2026-2027

Rating as of 20 Oct 2026
Power42.9
The football profile

Club DNA

RB LeipzigWerder Bremen

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 RB Leipzig · Power 68.1 ptsRB Leipzig · Attack 76.2 ptsRB Leipzig · Defence 52.7 ptsRB Leipzig · Form 77.5 ptsRB Leipzig · Consistency 62.5 ptsRB Leipzig · Squad Availability 91.4 % Werder Bremen · Power 42.9 ptsWerder Bremen · Attack 56.3 ptsWerder Bremen · Defence 44.7 ptsWerder Bremen · Form 70.5 ptsWerder Bremen · Consistency 59.9 ptsWerder Bremen · Squad Availability 74.8 % 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 RB Leipzig · Power 68.1 ptsRB Leipzig · Attack 76.2 ptsRB Leipzig · Defence 52.7 ptsRB Leipzig · Form 77.5 ptsRB Leipzig · Consistency 62.5 ptsRB Leipzig · Squad Availability 91.4 % Werder Bremen · Power 42.9 ptsWerder Bremen · Attack 56.3 ptsWerder Bremen · Defence 44.7 ptsWerder Bremen · Form 70.5 ptsWerder Bremen · Consistency 59.9 ptsWerder Bremen · Squad Availability 74.8 %
Ratings · 0–100 · Availability is a percentage

Strength comparison

Point gaps · Availability in percentage points

68.1Power42.9
RB Leipzig +25.2 pts
76.2Attack56.3
RB Leipzig +19.9 pts
52.7Defence44.7
RB Leipzig +8.0 pts
77.5Form70.5
RB Leipzig +7.0 pts
62.5Consistency59.9
RB Leipzig +2.6 pts
91.4%Squad Availability74.8%
RB Leipzig +16.6 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

  • RB Leipzig has the higher Power rating.
  • RB Leipzig has the stronger attacking profile.
  • RB Leipzig holds the defensive advantage.
  • RB Leipzig 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.

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

Werder Bremen · 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.

RB Leipzig · Current gap SD 1.12 points · mean gap 0.18 · Full window

Werder Bremen · Current gap SD 1.20 points · mean gap -0.09 · 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 RB Leipzig · Possession 54.0 %RB Leipzig · Pass accuracy 87.2 %RB Leipzig · Shots in the box 68.8 %RB Leipzig · On target share 36.0 %RB Leipzig · Shot Frequency 3.2 shots/100 passesRB Leipzig · Corner Pressure 4.8 corners/90 Werder Bremen · Possession 46.4 %Werder Bremen · Pass accuracy 82.8 %Werder Bremen · Shots in the box 62.3 %Werder Bremen · On target share 41.7 %Werder Bremen · Shot Frequency 2.8 shots/100 passesWerder Bremen · 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 RB Leipzig · Possession 54.0 %RB Leipzig · Pass accuracy 87.2 %RB Leipzig · Shots in the box 68.8 %RB Leipzig · On target share 36.0 %RB Leipzig · Shot Frequency 3.2 shots/100 passesRB Leipzig · Corner Pressure 4.8 corners/90 Werder Bremen · Possession 46.4 %Werder Bremen · Pass accuracy 82.8 %Werder Bremen · Shots in the box 62.3 %Werder Bremen · On target share 41.7 %Werder Bremen · Shot Frequency 2.8 shots/100 passesWerder Bremen · 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

54.0%Possession46.4%
RB Leipzig +7.6 pp
87.2%Pass accuracy82.8%
RB Leipzig +4.4 pp
68.8%Shots in the box62.3%
RB Leipzig +6.5 pp
36.0%On target share41.7%
Werder Bremen +5.7 pp
3.2Shot Frequency2.8
RB Leipzig +0.5 shots/100 passes
4.8Corner Pressure3.9
RB Leipzig +0.9 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.

RB Leipzig · 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.

Werder Bremen · 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 RB Leipzig · Power 67.7 ptsRB Leipzig · Attack 75.5 ptsRB Leipzig · Defence 61.1 ptsRB Leipzig · Form 52.2 ptsRB Leipzig · Consistency 60.5 ptsRB Leipzig · Squad Availability 89.6 % Werder Bremen · Power 40.6 ptsWerder Bremen · Form 62.7 ptsWerder Bremen · Consistency 62.9 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 RB Leipzig · Power 67.7 ptsRB Leipzig · Attack 75.5 ptsRB Leipzig · Defence 61.1 ptsRB Leipzig · Form 52.2 ptsRB Leipzig · Consistency 60.5 ptsRB Leipzig · Squad Availability 89.6 % Werder Bremen · Power 40.6 ptsWerder Bremen · Form 62.7 ptsWerder Bremen · Consistency 62.9 pts
Ratings · 0–100 · Availability is a percentage

Strength comparison

Point gaps · Availability in percentage points

67.7Power40.6
RB Leipzig +27.1 pts
75.5Attack—
Shared data unavailable
61.1Defence—
Shared data unavailable
52.2Form62.7
Werder Bremen +10.5 pts
60.5Consistency62.9
Werder Bremen +2.4 pts
89.6%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

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

RB Leipzig · Power 8 · Attack 3 · Defence 3 · Form 5 · Consistency 8 · Squad Availability 3 · 3 pre-match / 5 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.

Werder Bremen · Power 6 · Attack 2 · Defence 2 · Form 3 · Consistency 6 · Squad Availability 2 · 2 pre-match / 4 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.

RB Leipzig · Current gap SD 1.12 points · mean gap 0.18 · Full window

Werder Bremen · Current gap SD 1.20 points · mean gap -0.09 · 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 RB Leipzig · Possession 52.5 %RB Leipzig · Pass accuracy 86.7 %RB Leipzig · Shots in the box 69.3 %RB Leipzig · On target share 36.8 %RB Leipzig · Shot Frequency 3.5 shots/100 passesRB Leipzig · Corner Pressure 5.5 corners/90 Werder Bremen · Possession 47.3 %Werder Bremen · Pass accuracy 84.0 %Werder Bremen · Shots in the box 66.5 %Werder Bremen · On target share 48.8 %Werder Bremen · Shot Frequency 2.9 shots/100 passesWerder Bremen · Corner Pressure 3.7 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 RB Leipzig · Possession 52.5 %RB Leipzig · Pass accuracy 86.7 %RB Leipzig · Shots in the box 69.3 %RB Leipzig · On target share 36.8 %RB Leipzig · Shot Frequency 3.5 shots/100 passesRB Leipzig · Corner Pressure 5.5 corners/90 Werder Bremen · Possession 47.3 %Werder Bremen · Pass accuracy 84.0 %Werder Bremen · Shots in the box 66.5 %Werder Bremen · On target share 48.8 %Werder Bremen · Shot Frequency 2.9 shots/100 passesWerder Bremen · Corner Pressure 3.7 corners/90
Native units · axis ranges shown · larger is not better

How they play

Differences in each metric’s native units

52.5%Possession47.3%
RB Leipzig +5.2 pp
86.7%Pass accuracy84.0%
RB Leipzig +2.7 pp
69.3%Shots in the box66.5%
RB Leipzig +2.8 pp
36.8%On target share48.8%
Werder Bremen +12.0 pp
3.5Shot Frequency2.9
RB Leipzig +0.5 shots/100 passes
5.5Corner Pressure3.7
RB Leipzig +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.

RB Leipzig · Window 6 matches · before 24 Oct 2026 · Shot Frequency 6/6 · Corner Pressure 6/6 covered regulation matches. Per-metric coverage of the four percentage shares is unavailable.

Werder Bremen · Window 6 matches · before 24 Oct 2026 · Shot Frequency 6/6 · Corner Pressure 6/6 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 RB Leipzig · 2026-08-29 13:30:00 UTC · 69.3 · backfill RB Leipzig · 2026-09-05 13:30:00 UTC · 70.3 · backfill RB Leipzig · 2026-09-10 19:00:00 UTC · 67.6 · backfill RB Leipzig · 2026-09-13 13:30:00 UTC · 65.8 · backfill RB Leipzig · 2026-09-20 13:30:00 UTC · 66.8 · backfill RB Leipzig · 2026-10-10 16:30:00 UTC · 65.7 · pre RB Leipzig · 2026-10-13 19:00:00 UTC · 67.4 · pre RB Leipzig · 2026-10-17 16:30:00 UTC · 68.7 · pre Werder Bremen · 2026-08-30 13:30:00 UTC · 38.7 · backfill Werder Bremen · 2026-09-05 13:30:00 UTC · 37.6 · backfill Werder Bremen · 2026-09-12 16:30:00 UTC · 40.5 · backfill Werder Bremen · 2026-09-19 13:30:00 UTC · 40.8 · backfill Werder Bremen · 2026-10-09 18:30:00 UTC · 42.2 · pre Werder Bremen · 2026-10-17 13:30:00 UTC · 43.5 · pre 29 Aug 202617 Oct 2026
RB LeipzigWerder Bremen
View history data and coverage
ClubDate (UTC)PowerSource
RB Leipzig2026-08-29 13:30:0069.3Historical Elo backfill
RB Leipzig2026-09-05 13:30:0070.3Historical Elo backfill
RB Leipzig2026-09-10 19:00:0067.6Historical Elo backfill
RB Leipzig2026-09-13 13:30:0065.8Historical Elo backfill
RB Leipzig2026-09-20 13:30:0066.8Historical Elo backfill
RB Leipzig2026-10-10 16:30:0065.7Saved pre-match
RB Leipzig2026-10-13 19:00:0067.4Saved pre-match
RB Leipzig2026-10-17 16:30:0068.7Saved pre-match
Werder Bremen2026-08-30 13:30:0038.7Historical Elo backfill
Werder Bremen2026-09-05 13:30:0037.6Historical Elo backfill
Werder Bremen2026-09-12 16:30:0040.5Historical Elo backfill
Werder Bremen2026-09-19 13:30:0040.8Historical Elo backfill
Werder Bremen2026-10-09 18:30:0042.2Saved pre-match
Werder Bremen2026-10-17 13:30:0043.5Saved pre-match
Chances, finishing & results

Efficiency

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

Last 10

RB Leipzig
Werder Bremen
ConversionGoals / shots · %
12.8% 10/10 covered
11.0% 10/10 covered
Save RateSaves / shots on target faced · %
69.2% 10/10 covered
66.1% 10/10 covered
Goals − xGFinishing gap · per match
+0.30 9/10 covered
+0.09 10/10 covered
xGA − GAGoals prevented · per match
-0.21 9/10 covered
-0.09 10/10 covered
Shot QualityObserved xG / shot
0.115 9/10 covered
0.103 10/10 covered
Shot VolumeShots / 90
16.4 10/10 covered
12.7 10/10 covered
xG / matchLeague season · fixed window
2.13 6/6 covered
1.58 6/6 covered
xGA / matchLeague season · fixed window
1.76 6/6 covered
1.68 6/6 covered
Points / gameLeague season · fixed window
1.50 6/6 league matches
1.50 6/6 league matches
Points vs expected · Form windowUp to 5 matches · stored pure forecasts
+1.70 5/5 Form window
+3.57 5/5 Form window

RB Leipzig · Statistics before 24 Oct 2026 · Recent results L · W · W · L · W

Werder Bremen · Statistics before 24 Oct 2026 · Recent results D · D · W · D · W

League season

RB Leipzig
Werder Bremen
ConversionGoals / shots · %
15.1% 6/6 covered
14.3% 6/6 covered
Save RateSaves / shots on target faced · %
76.6% 6/6 covered
60.6% 6/6 covered
Goals − xGFinishing gap · per match
+0.54 6/6 covered
+0.42 6/6 covered
xGA − GAGoals prevented · per match
-0.07 6/6 covered
-0.32 6/6 covered
Shot QualityObserved xG / shot
0.121 6/6 covered
0.113 6/6 covered
Shot VolumeShots / 90
17.7 6/6 covered
14.0 6/6 covered
xG / matchLeague season · fixed window
2.13 6/6 covered
1.58 6/6 covered
xGA / matchLeague season · fixed window
1.76 6/6 covered
1.68 6/6 covered
Points / gameLeague season · fixed window
1.50 6/6 league matches
1.50 6/6 league matches
Points vs expected · Form windowUp to 5 matches · stored pure forecasts
+1.70 5/5 Form window
+3.57 5/5 Form window

RB Leipzig · Statistics before 24 Oct 2026 · Recent results L · W · W · L · W

Werder Bremen · Statistics before 24 Oct 2026 · Recent results D · D · W · D · 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 →