Football / The bigger picture

Insights.

Go beyond the result. Follow the patterns. See the evidence.

How to read the signals →

Explore insights

Explore competitions →

Competition selects current clubs. Result windows include all recorded competitions; points comparisons use covered current-league matches.

League insights

Ligue 1 · 14 signals · 14 clubs in this view

Explore all signals ↓

Automatically selected connections · one story per club · experimental Insight Score orders stories, not teams.

LensChance balance ahead of the points returnInsight Score67/100

A positive observed xG balance sits alongside points below stored forecast expectations. These are different windows: inspect finishing, conceding and individual matches before assigning a cause.

Points minus expected9/9 current-league matches · 2026-08-22 → 2026-10-17 UTC
Stored LOAD90 forecasts · same covered games
−3.0
Observed xG difference / match10-match profile · exact dates unavailable
Observed match xG · available averages
+0.80
Goals scored / matchLast 9 recorded matches · 2026-08-22 → 2026-10-17 UTC
Recorded scores · all competitions
1.9
Full club analysis →Different windows, shown individually. Connections invite analysis; they do not establish a cause.
Sources, limitations & score
Insight Score 67/100 Experimental · editorial interest
Deviation
53.3
Recency
61.3
Context
100.0
Quality
63.3

Uncalibrated selection heuristic. Not team strength, win probability or statistical significance. Sources keep their own windows; overlapping scorelines and forecast gaps receive reduced context credit.

  • Points minus expected — Points 13; xPts 16. Saved pre: 3; reconstructed: 6. No claim that the gap must reverse. This window differs from the recorded-results and xG windows.
  • Observed xG difference / match — Before next/latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC. xG for 2.25; xG against 1.45. Coverage counts are unavailable and denominators can differ. Recency receives zero for this undated source; quality is capped at 40.
  • Goals scored / match — Ligue 1 2026-2027: 1.52 goals per team/match, 63 matches · 2026-08-21 → 2026-10-18 UTC. Reference only: the club window spans all recorded competitions; no opponent adjustment.
Paris Saint GermainGoals accompanied by a positive chance balanceInsight Score66/100

Goals scored exceed the current league reference, alongside a positive observed xG profile. The sources have different windows; both describe past performances rather than the next result.

Goals scored / matchLast 9 recorded matches · 2026-08-23 → 2026-10-17 UTC
Recorded scores · all competitions
2.7
Observed xG difference / match10-match profile · exact dates unavailable
Observed match xG · available averages
+1.09
Wins in a rowLast 9 recorded matches · 2026-08-23 → 2026-10-17 UTC
Recorded scores · all competitions
6
Full club analysis →Different windows, shown individually. Connections invite analysis; they do not establish a cause.
Sources, limitations & score
Insight Score 66/100 Experimental · editorial interest
Deviation
72.7
Recency
45.9
Context
80.0
Quality
65.0

Uncalibrated selection heuristic. Not team strength, win probability or statistical significance. Sources keep their own windows; overlapping scorelines and forecast gaps receive reduced context credit.

  • Goals scored / match — Ligue 1 2026-2027: 1.52 goals per team/match, 63 matches · 2026-08-21 → 2026-10-18 UTC. Reference only: the club window spans all recorded competitions; no opponent adjustment.
  • Observed xG difference / match — Before next/latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC. xG for 2.37; xG against 1.28. Coverage counts are unavailable and denominators can differ. Recency receives zero for this undated source; quality is capped at 40.
  • Wins in a row — A run of 10 is a lower bound. Related result sequences share one evidence family.
MarseilleChance balance ahead of the points returnInsight Score63/100

A positive observed xG balance sits alongside points below stored forecast expectations. These are different windows: inspect finishing, conceding and individual matches before assigning a cause.

Points minus expected9/9 current-league matches · 2026-08-21 → 2026-10-18 UTC
Stored LOAD90 forecasts · same covered games
−3.8
Observed xG difference / match10-match profile · exact dates unavailable
Observed match xG · available averages
+0.50
Goals scored / matchLast 9 recorded matches · 2026-08-21 → 2026-10-18 UTC
Recorded scores · all competitions
1.7
Full club analysis →Different windows, shown individually. Connections invite analysis; they do not establish a cause.
Sources, limitations & score
Insight Score 63/100 Experimental · editorial interest
Deviation
40.7
Recency
63.3
Context
100.0
Quality
63.3

Uncalibrated selection heuristic. Not team strength, win probability or statistical significance. Sources keep their own windows; overlapping scorelines and forecast gaps receive reduced context credit.

  • Points minus expected — Points 9; xPts 12.8. Saved pre: 3; reconstructed: 6. No claim that the gap must reverse. This window differs from the recorded-results and xG windows.
  • Observed xG difference / match — Before next/latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC. xG for 1.83; xG against 1.33. Coverage counts are unavailable and denominators can differ. Recency receives zero for this undated source; quality is capped at 40.
  • Goals scored / match — Ligue 1 2026-2027: 1.52 goals per team/match, 63 matches · 2026-08-21 → 2026-10-18 UTC. Reference only: the club window spans all recorded competitions; no opponent adjustment.
LyonPoints ahead. Chance balance tells another story.Insight Score57/100

Points exceed the stored forecasts, while the observed xG profile has no positive balance. Results and chances tell different stories; this does not establish that a reversal is due.

Points minus expected9/9 current-league matches · 2026-08-22 → 2026-10-18 UTC
Stored LOAD90 forecasts · same covered games
+5.0
Observed xG difference / match10-match profile · exact dates unavailable
Observed match xG · available averages
−0.25
Full club analysis →Different windows, shown individually. Connections invite analysis; they do not establish a cause.
Sources, limitations & score
Insight Score 57/100 Experimental · editorial interest
Deviation
53.6
Recency
47.5
Context
80.0
Quality
50.0

Uncalibrated selection heuristic. Not team strength, win probability or statistical significance. Sources keep their own windows; overlapping scorelines and forecast gaps receive reduced context credit.

  • Points minus expected — Points 20; xPts 15. Saved pre: 3; reconstructed: 6. No claim that the gap must reverse. This window differs from the recorded-results and xG windows.
  • Observed xG difference / match — Before next/latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC. xG for 1.32; xG against 1.57. Coverage counts are unavailable and denominators can differ. Recency receives zero for this undated source; quality is capped at 40.
Paris FCDefensive consistency, positive chance balanceInsight Score53/100

Clean sheets and low goals conceded accompany a positive observed xG balance. The xG profile describes overall chance balance; it is not, by itself, proof of strong defending.

Clean sheetsLast 7 recorded matches · 2026-08-22 → 2026-10-18 UTC
Recorded scores · all competitions
3/7
Goals conceded / matchLast 7 recorded matches · 2026-08-22 → 2026-10-18 UTC
Recorded scores · all competitions
1.0
Observed xG difference / match10-match profile · exact dates unavailable
Observed match xG · available averages
+0.62
Full club analysis →Different windows, shown individually. Connections invite analysis; they do not establish a cause.
Sources, limitations & score
Insight Score 53/100 Experimental · editorial interest
Deviation
41.3
Recency
47.5
Context
80.0
Quality
55.0

Uncalibrated selection heuristic. Not team strength, win probability or statistical significance. Sources keep their own windows; overlapping scorelines and forecast gaps receive reduced context credit.

  • Clean sheets — Ligue 1 2026-2027: 1.52 goals per team/match, 63 matches · 2026-08-21 → 2026-10-18 UTC. Reference only: the club window spans all recorded competitions; no opponent adjustment.
  • Goals conceded / match — Ligue 1 2026-2027: 1.52 goals per team/match, 63 matches · 2026-08-21 → 2026-10-18 UTC. Reference only: the club window spans all recorded competitions; no opponent adjustment.
  • Observed xG difference / match — Before next/latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC. xG for 1.77; xG against 1.15. Coverage counts are unavailable and denominators can differ. Recency receives zero for this undated source; quality is capped at 40.

Each signal belongs to one category. Categories sum to All signals; stories combine related evidence across categories.

Performance14 signals · 14 clubs

Reset filters

Select a row to explore the evidence. Scroll to see all columns →

Le Mans xG difference per match −1.39 Underlying performance · 7-match window Observed xG42
Observed xG Le Mans −1.39 xG difference per match Underlying performance · 7-match window xG for1.50xG against2.89

Chances allowed exceed chances created in the observed playing-style profile. The two averages can have different xG coverage.

Observed match xG · available averages · 7-match profile · exact dates unavailable. Before next/latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC. xG for 1.5; xG against 2.89. Coverage counts are unavailable and denominators can differ. Recency receives zero for this undated source; quality is capped at 40.

Insight Score 42/100 Experimental · editorial interest
Deviation
81.1
Recency
0.0
Context
40.0
Quality
28.0

Uncalibrated selection heuristic. Not team strength, win probability or statistical significance. Sources keep their own windows; overlapping scorelines and forecast gaps receive reduced context credit.

Underlying performance · 7-match window

xG for
1.50
xG against
2.89

Difference of observed averages; xG coverage can differ between the two metrics. Profile is before the next or latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC.

Full club analysis →
Paris Saint Germain xG difference per match +1.09 Underlying performance · 10-match window Observed xG41
Observed xG Paris Saint Germain +1.09 xG difference per match Underlying performance · 10-match window xG for2.37xG against1.28

Chance creation is ahead of chances allowed in the observed playing-style profile. This describes the balance of chances, rather than the final scores.

Observed match xG · available averages · 10-match profile · exact dates unavailable. Before next/latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC. xG for 2.37; xG against 1.28. Coverage counts are unavailable and denominators can differ. Recency receives zero for this undated source; quality is capped at 40.

Insight Score 41/100 Experimental · editorial interest
Deviation
72.7
Recency
0.0
Context
40.0
Quality
40.0

Uncalibrated selection heuristic. Not team strength, win probability or statistical significance. Sources keep their own windows; overlapping scorelines and forecast gaps receive reduced context credit.

Underlying performance · 10-match window

xG for
2.37
xG against
1.28

Difference of observed averages; xG coverage can differ between the two metrics. Profile is before the next or latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC.

Full club analysis →
Lens xG difference per match +0.80 Underlying performance · 10-match window Observed xG35
Observed xG Lens +0.80 xG difference per match Underlying performance · 10-match window xG for2.25xG against1.45

Chance creation is ahead of chances allowed in the observed playing-style profile. This describes the balance of chances, rather than the final scores.

Observed match xG · available averages · 10-match profile · exact dates unavailable. Before next/latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC. xG for 2.25; xG against 1.45. Coverage counts are unavailable and denominators can differ. Recency receives zero for this undated source; quality is capped at 40.

Insight Score 35/100 Experimental · editorial interest
Deviation
53.3
Recency
0.0
Context
40.0
Quality
40.0

Uncalibrated selection heuristic. Not team strength, win probability or statistical significance. Sources keep their own windows; overlapping scorelines and forecast gaps receive reduced context credit.

Underlying performance · 10-match window

xG for
2.25
xG against
1.45

Difference of observed averages; xG coverage can differ between the two metrics. Profile is before the next or latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC.

Full club analysis →
Strasbourg xG difference per match −0.72 Underlying performance · 10-match window Observed xG33
Observed xG Strasbourg −0.72 xG difference per match Underlying performance · 10-match window xG for1.21xG against1.93

Chances allowed exceed chances created in the observed playing-style profile. The two averages can have different xG coverage.

Observed match xG · available averages · 10-match profile · exact dates unavailable. Before next/latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC. xG for 1.21; xG against 1.93. Coverage counts are unavailable and denominators can differ. Recency receives zero for this undated source; quality is capped at 40.

Insight Score 33/100 Experimental · editorial interest
Deviation
48.0
Recency
0.0
Context
40.0
Quality
40.0

Uncalibrated selection heuristic. Not team strength, win probability or statistical significance. Sources keep their own windows; overlapping scorelines and forecast gaps receive reduced context credit.

Underlying performance · 10-match window

xG for
1.21
xG against
1.93

Difference of observed averages; xG coverage can differ between the two metrics. Profile is before the next or latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC.

Full club analysis →
Stade Brestois 29 xG difference per match +0.73 Underlying performance · 10-match window Observed xG33
Observed xG Stade Brestois 29 +0.73 xG difference per match Underlying performance · 10-match window xG for2.02xG against1.29

Chance creation is ahead of chances allowed in the observed playing-style profile. This describes the balance of chances, rather than the final scores.

Observed match xG · available averages · 10-match profile · exact dates unavailable. Before next/latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC. xG for 2.02; xG against 1.29. Coverage counts are unavailable and denominators can differ. Recency receives zero for this undated source; quality is capped at 40.

Insight Score 33/100 Experimental · editorial interest
Deviation
48.7
Recency
0.0
Context
40.0
Quality
40.0

Uncalibrated selection heuristic. Not team strength, win probability or statistical significance. Sources keep their own windows; overlapping scorelines and forecast gaps receive reduced context credit.

Underlying performance · 10-match window

xG for
2.02
xG against
1.29

Difference of observed averages; xG coverage can differ between the two metrics. Profile is before the next or latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC.

Full club analysis →
Paris FC xG difference per match +0.62 Underlying performance · 10-match window Observed xG30
Observed xG Paris FC +0.62 xG difference per match Underlying performance · 10-match window xG for1.77xG against1.15

Chance creation is ahead of chances allowed in the observed playing-style profile. This describes the balance of chances, rather than the final scores.

Observed match xG · available averages · 10-match profile · exact dates unavailable. Before next/latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC. xG for 1.77; xG against 1.15. Coverage counts are unavailable and denominators can differ. Recency receives zero for this undated source; quality is capped at 40.

Insight Score 30/100 Experimental · editorial interest
Deviation
41.3
Recency
0.0
Context
40.0
Quality
40.0

Uncalibrated selection heuristic. Not team strength, win probability or statistical significance. Sources keep their own windows; overlapping scorelines and forecast gaps receive reduced context credit.

Underlying performance · 10-match window

xG for
1.77
xG against
1.15

Difference of observed averages; xG coverage can differ between the two metrics. Profile is before the next or latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC.

Full club analysis →
LE Havre xG difference per match −0.64 Underlying performance · 10-match window Observed xG31
Observed xG LE Havre −0.64 xG difference per match Underlying performance · 10-match window xG for0.95xG against1.59

Chances allowed exceed chances created in the observed playing-style profile. The two averages can have different xG coverage.

Observed match xG · available averages · 10-match profile · exact dates unavailable. Before next/latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC. xG for 0.95; xG against 1.59. Coverage counts are unavailable and denominators can differ. Recency receives zero for this undated source; quality is capped at 40.

Insight Score 31/100 Experimental · editorial interest
Deviation
42.7
Recency
0.0
Context
40.0
Quality
40.0

Uncalibrated selection heuristic. Not team strength, win probability or statistical significance. Sources keep their own windows; overlapping scorelines and forecast gaps receive reduced context credit.

Underlying performance · 10-match window

xG for
0.95
xG against
1.59

Difference of observed averages; xG coverage can differ between the two metrics. Profile is before the next or latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC.

Full club analysis →
Auxerre xG difference per match −0.63 Underlying performance · 10-match window Observed xG31
Observed xG Auxerre −0.63 xG difference per match Underlying performance · 10-match window xG for1.47xG against2.10

Chances allowed exceed chances created in the observed playing-style profile. The two averages can have different xG coverage.

Observed match xG · available averages · 10-match profile · exact dates unavailable. Before next/latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC. xG for 1.47; xG against 2.1. Coverage counts are unavailable and denominators can differ. Recency receives zero for this undated source; quality is capped at 40.

Insight Score 31/100 Experimental · editorial interest
Deviation
42.0
Recency
0.0
Context
40.0
Quality
40.0

Uncalibrated selection heuristic. Not team strength, win probability or statistical significance. Sources keep their own windows; overlapping scorelines and forecast gaps receive reduced context credit.

Underlying performance · 10-match window

xG for
1.47
xG against
2.10

Difference of observed averages; xG coverage can differ between the two metrics. Profile is before the next or latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC.

Full club analysis →
Marseille xG difference per match +0.50 Underlying performance · 10-match window Observed xG28
Observed xG Marseille +0.50 xG difference per match Underlying performance · 10-match window xG for1.83xG against1.33

Chance creation is ahead of chances allowed in the observed playing-style profile. This describes the balance of chances, rather than the final scores.

Observed match xG · available averages · 10-match profile · exact dates unavailable. Before next/latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC. xG for 1.83; xG against 1.33. Coverage counts are unavailable and denominators can differ. Recency receives zero for this undated source; quality is capped at 40.

Insight Score 28/100 Experimental · editorial interest
Deviation
33.3
Recency
0.0
Context
40.0
Quality
40.0

Uncalibrated selection heuristic. Not team strength, win probability or statistical significance. Sources keep their own windows; overlapping scorelines and forecast gaps receive reduced context credit.

Underlying performance · 10-match window

xG for
1.83
xG against
1.33

Difference of observed averages; xG coverage can differ between the two metrics. Profile is before the next or latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC.

Full club analysis →
Toulouse xG difference per match +0.33 Underlying performance · 10-match window Observed xG24
Observed xG Toulouse +0.33 xG difference per match Underlying performance · 10-match window xG for1.39xG against1.06

Chance creation is ahead of chances allowed in the observed playing-style profile. This describes the balance of chances, rather than the final scores.

Observed match xG · available averages · 10-match profile · exact dates unavailable. Before next/latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC. xG for 1.39; xG against 1.06. Coverage counts are unavailable and denominators can differ. Recency receives zero for this undated source; quality is capped at 40.

Insight Score 24/100 Experimental · editorial interest
Deviation
22.0
Recency
0.0
Context
40.0
Quality
40.0

Uncalibrated selection heuristic. Not team strength, win probability or statistical significance. Sources keep their own windows; overlapping scorelines and forecast gaps receive reduced context credit.

Underlying performance · 10-match window

xG for
1.39
xG against
1.06

Difference of observed averages; xG coverage can differ between the two metrics. Profile is before the next or latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC.

Full club analysis →
Angers xG difference per match −0.44 Underlying performance · 10-match window Observed xG26
Observed xG Angers −0.44 xG difference per match Underlying performance · 10-match window xG for1.52xG against1.96

Chances allowed exceed chances created in the observed playing-style profile. The two averages can have different xG coverage.

Observed match xG · available averages · 10-match profile · exact dates unavailable. Before next/latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC. xG for 1.52; xG against 1.96. Coverage counts are unavailable and denominators can differ. Recency receives zero for this undated source; quality is capped at 40.

Insight Score 26/100 Experimental · editorial interest
Deviation
29.3
Recency
0.0
Context
40.0
Quality
40.0

Uncalibrated selection heuristic. Not team strength, win probability or statistical significance. Sources keep their own windows; overlapping scorelines and forecast gaps receive reduced context credit.

Underlying performance · 10-match window

xG for
1.52
xG against
1.96

Difference of observed averages; xG coverage can differ between the two metrics. Profile is before the next or latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC.

Full club analysis →
Estac Troyes xG difference per match −0.41 Underlying performance · 10-match window Observed xG26
Observed xG Estac Troyes −0.41 xG difference per match Underlying performance · 10-match window xG for1.03xG against1.44

Chances allowed exceed chances created in the observed playing-style profile. The two averages can have different xG coverage.

Observed match xG · available averages · 10-match profile · exact dates unavailable. Before next/latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC. xG for 1.03; xG against 1.44. Coverage counts are unavailable and denominators can differ. Recency receives zero for this undated source; quality is capped at 40.

Insight Score 26/100 Experimental · editorial interest
Deviation
27.3
Recency
0.0
Context
40.0
Quality
40.0

Uncalibrated selection heuristic. Not team strength, win probability or statistical significance. Sources keep their own windows; overlapping scorelines and forecast gaps receive reduced context credit.

Underlying performance · 10-match window

xG for
1.03
xG against
1.44

Difference of observed averages; xG coverage can differ between the two metrics. Profile is before the next or latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC.

Full club analysis →
Rennes xG difference per match +0.21 Underlying performance · 10-match window Observed xG21
Observed xG Rennes +0.21 xG difference per match Underlying performance · 10-match window xG for2.12xG against1.91

Chance creation is ahead of chances allowed in the observed playing-style profile. This describes the balance of chances, rather than the final scores.

Observed match xG · available averages · 10-match profile · exact dates unavailable. Before next/latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC. xG for 2.12; xG against 1.91. Coverage counts are unavailable and denominators can differ. Recency receives zero for this undated source; quality is capped at 40.

Insight Score 21/100 Experimental · editorial interest
Deviation
14.0
Recency
0.0
Context
40.0
Quality
40.0

Uncalibrated selection heuristic. Not team strength, win probability or statistical significance. Sources keep their own windows; overlapping scorelines and forecast gaps receive reduced context credit.

Underlying performance · 10-match window

xG for
2.12
xG against
1.91

Difference of observed averages; xG coverage can differ between the two metrics. Profile is before the next or latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC.

Full club analysis →
Lyon xG difference per match −0.25 Underlying performance · 10-match window Observed xG22
Observed xG Lyon −0.25 xG difference per match Underlying performance · 10-match window xG for1.32xG against1.57

Chances allowed exceed chances created in the observed playing-style profile. The two averages can have different xG coverage.

Observed match xG · available averages · 10-match profile · exact dates unavailable. Before next/latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC. xG for 1.32; xG against 1.57. Coverage counts are unavailable and denominators can differ. Recency receives zero for this undated source; quality is capped at 40.

Insight Score 22/100 Experimental · editorial interest
Deviation
16.7
Recency
0.0
Context
40.0
Quality
40.0

Uncalibrated selection heuristic. Not team strength, win probability or statistical significance. Sources keep their own windows; overlapping scorelines and forecast gaps receive reduced context credit.

Underlying performance · 10-match window

xG for
1.32
xG against
1.57

Difference of observed averages; xG coverage can differ between the two metrics. Profile is before the next or latest league fixture, not necessarily current UTC.

Full club analysis →

Showing 1–14 of 14 signals

About these insights
A little context goes a long way

Read the signal. Keep the context.

Insights describe what is recorded. Use club and match analysis to explore what comes next.

Insight Score · experimental editorial interest. This version uses 0.35D + 0.25R + 0.20C + 0.20Q. D measures heuristic deviation, R observation recency, C breadth of evidence families and Q data quality. These starting weights are uncalibrated. It is neither team strength, win probability, statistical significance nor forecast confidence. Related result signals share one family; different sources are not automatically statistically independent. Unknown dates receive zero recency; unknown xG coverage limits its quality component. League averages are context references, not opponent-adjusted estimates.

01

Check the window

Result signals use the last 10 recorded matches; away signals use the last 8 away matches. At least 5 are required. Missing and special results are excluded. A 10+ streak is a lower bound.

02

Read the chart

Bars run oldest to newest. Height shows goals scored or conceded, capped at 6; zero keeps a marker. Teal / amber / red means win / draw / loss. Faded bars mean the event did not happen. Open the evidence for full scores.

03

Separate the sources

xG uses observed Playing style averages before the next or latest league fixture; coverage can differ between inputs. xPts comes from stored LOAD90 forecasts on identical covered games, including labelled historical reconstructions.

Types alternate for variety. Values are ordered within their own metric, without a combined ranking. These descriptive signals do not change the LOAD90 forecast.

Explore methodology →