Compare Marseille vs AGF

Marseille vs AGF Head-to-Head Stats and Form Comparison

Compare Marseille vs AGF: head-to-head stats, recent form, goals, defensive record and strength indicators from last matches.

Marseille Home Team

AGF Away Team

Marseille

45.3

W L D L W L L W W D

Last 10 Matches

AGF

52.9

W W D D L D W D D W

Categories Won

Marseille

Draw

AGF

Performance Radar

Marseille

AGF

Statistical Comparison

Win Percentage

40%

4W, 2D, 4L

40%

4W, 5D, 1L

Goals Scored / Match

1.1

11 / 10 matches

1.2

12 / 10 matches

Goals Conceded / Match

1.3

13 / 10 matches

0.8

8 / 10 matches

Goal Difference

-2

Clean Sheet

30%

3 / 10 matches

30%

3 / 10 matches

Over 2.5 Goals

50%

5 / 10 matches

40%

4 / 10 matches

Both Teams to Score

50%

5 / 10 matches

70%

7 / 10 matches

Top Scorer

M. Greenwood (3 goals)

T. Bech (2 goals)

Most Goals by Half

1st Half: 4 / 2nd Half: 7

1st Half: 6 / 2nd Half: 6

Home Win Rate

40%

2W / 5 matches

25%

1W / 4 matches

Away Win Rate

40%

2W / 5 matches

50%

3W / 6 matches

Schedule Strength (SoS)

53.7

League Difficulty: 81.9, Opponent Quality: 59.9

52.4

League Difficulty: 55.0, Opponent Quality: 50.7

Elite Opponent Record

0W / 2 matches

0W / 0 matches

Expected Goals (xG)

1.17

Actual: 1.1 | Diff: -0.07

1.14

Actual: 1.2 | Diff: +0.06

Adjusted Power Rating

45.3

Attack: 38.0, Defense: 58.8, Form: 41.5

52.9

Attack: 41.0, Defense: 75.1, Form: 41.0

Goal Timing Analysis

0-15'

16-30'

31-45'

46-60'

61-75'

76-90+'

Marseille

AGF

Power Rating Breakdown

45.3

Overall

Attack 38.0

Defense 58.8

Form 41.5

Consistency 44.8

Power Rating Breakdown

52.9

Overall

Attack 41.0

Defense 75.1

Form 41.0

Consistency 63.7

Strength of Schedule

Measures the difficulty of opponents faced. Higher = tougher schedule.

League Difficulty

81.9 vs 55.0

Opponent Quality

59.9 vs 50.7

Elite Opponent Record

0% vs 0%

Marseille

AGF

Opponent Quality: Quality blends league strength, recent points form, goal difference, and home/away context. It is not only club size or reputation.

Opponent Breakdown

League

Score

Opp. Quality

Le Havre A

French Ligue 1

1 - 0 W

58%

Nantes A

French Ligue 1

0 - 3 L

56%

Nice H

French Ligue 1

1 - 1 D

55%

Lorient A

French Ligue 1

0 - 2 L

69%

Metz H

French Ligue 1

3 - 1 W

43%

Monaco A

French Ligue 1

1 - 2 L

77%

Lille H

French Ligue 1

1 - 2 L

73%

Auxerre H

French Ligue 1

1 - 0 W

66%

Toulouse A

French Ligue 1

1 - 0 W

62%

Toulouse H

Coupe de France

2 - 2 D

40%

Opponent Breakdown

League

Score

Opp. Quality

Brøndby A

Danish Superligaen

2 - 0 W

49%

Sønderjyske H

Danish Superligaen

2 - 1 W

43%

Midtjylland H

Danish Superligaen

0 - 0 D

52%

Nordsjælland A

Danish Superligaen

1 - 1 D

60%

Midtjylland A

Danish Superligaen

1 - 2 L

57%

Nordsjælland H

Danish Superligaen

1 - 1 D

55%

Viborg A

Danish Superligaen

2 - 1 W

55%

Brøndby H

Danish Superligaen

0 - 0 D

44%

Sønderjyske A

Danish Superligaen

1 - 1 D

48%

Vejle A

Danish Superligaen

2 - 1 W

44%

AI Analysis

The statistics point to a clear direction in this matchup, though the underdog should not be underestimated.

Both teams have faced similar levels of opposition (SoS: 53.7 vs 52.4), making the raw statistics a reliable basis for comparison.

Both teams are evenly matched in attack, with Marseille averaging 1.1 and AGF averaging 1.2 goals per match.

AGF has the defensive edge, conceding 0.8 per match compared to Marseille's 1.3.

AGF has not faced any elite-level opponents in their recent matches, making it difficult to assess their ceiling.

Based on the combined statistics, expect 2.2 total goals. Under 2.5 goals is the statistical lean, with both teams to score being likely.

AGF has the edge based on adjusted metrics, but this is far from a foregone conclusion. The 7.6 point power rating difference suggests a competitive match where small details could decide the outcome.

Match Simulator

AI-powered match simulation based on real statistics

Marseille

AGF

In H2H (head-to-head) matchups, to eliminate momentary fluctuations and coincidences, we limit our analyses to an optimal depth of exactly 10 matches. Neither less, nor more. This focused approach is our undisputed gold standard, revealing the tactical and psychological supremacy teams hold over each other in its purest form. We do not dwell on the noise of the past; we concentrate on the millimetric precision of current form.

Compare Another Pair