Fantasy Premier League

Differentials worth owning

A player nobody owns is not a differential on his own — most of them are players nobody owns for a reason. Every row here clears an ownership threshold and a minutes floor, is ranked on the model's own currency, and says how much of its edge is the projection and how much is only the field's absence.

The field's biggest blind spot

Anton Stach

MID · LEE · 6.0m · owned by 2.5%

+3.47

Edge

That is 13.4 projected points over the next 5 rounds, which is what the board under it is ranked on.

Gameweek 6 · 5-round window · feed of 01/10 11:39

Anton Stach is the best-projected player in the game owned by under 5%: 13.4 over 5 rounds at 6.0m, held by 2.5%.

Against Morgan Rogers, the most-owned player in his position at 41%, +1.14 of his edge is projection and +2.33 is the field he is not in — so 33% of the case for him is football rather than ownership.

Own

2.5%

The share of managers holding him, against the 5% gate this board opens at.

Proj edge

+1.14

What the model rates him over the most-owned player in his position. Positive is football; negative means the only case for him is that nobody owns him.

Own edge

+2.33

What the field's absence is worth at what the template is worth. The two halves add up to his whole edge.

What the minutes floor took

58 low-owned players are left off because the minutes model puts them under 45% to start.

See the minutes board →

The top five on this board

The board as your controls leave it — the same five that open the table below.

Ranked 1 Anton Stach

MID LEE vs

13.4 Ahead

Own

2.5%

Proj edge

+1.14

Own edge

+2.33

Against Morgan Rogers
3.6
1. ARS (A)
2. MUN (H)
3. SUN (A)
4. BOU (A)
5. TOT (H)
Ranked 2 Gonzalo García

FWD FUL vs

13.4 Ahead

Own

4.0%

Proj edge

−3.22

Own edge

+5.82

Against Erling Haaland
2.8
1. IPS (A)
2. HUL (H)
3. COV (A)
4. AVL (A)
5. NEW (H)
Ranked 3 Vitaly Janelt

MID BRE vs

13.3 Ahead

Own

2.5%

Proj edge

+1.06

Own edge

+2.33

Against Morgan Rogers
3.2
1. AVL (A)
2. LIV (H)
3. HUL (A)
4. NFO (H)
5. BHA (A)
Ranked 4 António Silva

DEF BOU vs

13.2 Ahead

Own

0.4%

Proj edge

+0.33

Own edge

+3.23

Against Riccardo Calafiori
3.0
1. CHE (A)
2. SUN (H)
3. MUN (A)
4. LEE (H)
5. IPS (A)
Ranked 5 Granit Xhaka

MID SUN vs

13.1 Ahead

Own

3.6%

Proj edge

+0.79

Own edge

+2.26

Against Morgan Rogers
2.8
1. BHA (H)
2. BOU (A)
3. LEE (H)
4. COV (A)
5. CHE (H)

Position

All GKP DEF MID FWD

Owned by under

10% 7% 5% 3%

Minutes played

Any 90+ 270+ 450+ 900+

At least

Any Very safe Safe Rotation risk

Rounds ahead

3 rounds 5 rounds 8 rounds

Price

Enter your squad to mark what you already own and what you could afford →

Showing 40 of 148 players 148 of 487 match your filters Clear filters

Player Price Pts Ahead Own Proj edge Own edge Start Next fixtures

1 Anton Stach MID vs LEE 6.0m 3.7 13.4 2.5% +1.14 +2.33 92%

ARS (A)
MUN (H)
SUN (A)
BOU (A)
TOT (H)

1 Anton Stach 13.4

MID vs LEE · 6.0m · 2.5% 92%

Proj edge: +1.14
Own edge: +2.33
Pts: 3.7

Against Morgan Rogers

ARS (A)
MUN (H)
SUN (A)
BOU (A)
TOT (H)

2 Gonzalo García FWD vs FUL 6.0m 3.9 13.4 4.0% −3.22 +5.82 92%

IPS (A)
HUL (H)
COV (A)
AVL (A)
NEW (H)

2 Gonzalo García 13.4

FWD vs FUL · 6.0m · 4.0% 92%

Proj edge: −3.22
Own edge: +5.82
Pts: 3.9

Against Erling Haaland

IPS (A)
HUL (H)
COV (A)
AVL (A)
NEW (H)

3 Vitaly Janelt MID vs BRE 5.0m 4.0 13.3 2.5% +1.06 +2.33 92%

AVL (A)
LIV (H)
HUL (A)
NFO (H)
BHA (A)

3 Vitaly Janelt 13.3

MID vs BRE · 5.0m · 2.5% 92%

Proj edge: +1.06
Own edge: +2.33
Pts: 4.0

Against Morgan Rogers

AVL (A)
LIV (H)
HUL (A)
NFO (H)
BHA (A)

4 António Silva DEF vs BOU 5.0m 3.8 13.2 0.4% +0.33 +3.23 92%

CHE (A)
SUN (H)
MUN (A)
LEE (H)
IPS (A)

4 António Silva 13.2

DEF vs BOU · 5.0m · 0.4% 92%

Proj edge: +0.33
Own edge: +3.23
Pts: 3.8

Against Riccardo Calafiori

CHE (A)
SUN (H)
MUN (A)
LEE (H)
IPS (A)

5 Granit Xhaka MID vs SUN 5.5m 4.0 13.1 3.6% +0.79 +2.26 92%

BHA (H)
BOU (A)
LEE (H)
COV (A)
CHE (H)

5 Granit Xhaka 13.1

MID vs SUN · 5.5m · 3.6% 92%

Proj edge: +0.79
Own edge: +2.26
Pts: 4.0

Against Morgan Rogers

BHA (H)
BOU (A)
LEE (H)
COV (A)
CHE (H)

6 Enzo Le Fée MID vs SUN 5.7m 4.0 13.0 3.4% +0.71 +2.27 92%

BHA (H)
BOU (A)
LEE (H)
COV (A)
CHE (H)

6 Enzo Le Fée 13.0

MID vs SUN · 5.7m · 3.4% 92%

Proj edge: +0.71
Own edge: +2.27
Pts: 4.0

Against Morgan Rogers

BHA (H)
BOU (A)
LEE (H)
COV (A)
CHE (H)

7 Tarik Muharemović DEF vs LEE 5.0m 3.5 12.5 4.3% −0.37 +2.98 92%

ARS (A)
MUN (H)
SUN (A)
BOU (A)
TOT (H)

7 Tarik Muharemović 12.5

DEF vs LEE · 5.0m · 4.3% 92%

Proj edge: −0.37
Own edge: +2.98
Pts: 3.5

Against Riccardo Calafiori

ARS (A)
MUN (H)
SUN (A)
BOU (A)
TOT (H)

8 Murillo DEF vs NFO 5.5m 3.8 12.3 2.1% −0.62 +3.12 92%

CRY (A)
ARS (H)
IPS (A)
BRE (A)
MCI (H)

8 Murillo 12.3

DEF vs NFO · 5.5m · 2.1% 92%

Proj edge: −0.62
Own edge: +3.12
Pts: 3.8

Against Riccardo Calafiori

CRY (A)
ARS (H)
IPS (A)
BRE (A)
MCI (H)

9 Josh King MID vs FUL 5.5m 3.5 12.2 2.6% −0.11 +2.32 92%

IPS (A)
HUL (H)
COV (A)
AVL (A)
NEW (H)

9 Josh King 12.2

MID vs FUL · 5.5m · 2.6% 92%

Proj edge: −0.11
Own edge: +2.32
Pts: 3.5

Against Morgan Rogers

IPS (A)
HUL (H)
COV (A)
AVL (A)
NEW (H)

10 Alisson Becker GKP vs LIV 5.5m 3.6 12.1 4.1% −1.08 +2.53 92%

MCI (H)
BRE (A)
BHA (H)
ARS (H)
CRY (A)

10 Alisson Becker 12.1

GKP vs LIV · 5.5m · 4.1% 92%

Proj edge: −1.08
Own edge: +2.53
Pts: 3.6

Against David Raya Martín

MCI (H)
BRE (A)
BHA (H)
ARS (H)
CRY (A)

11 Chris Richards DEF vs CRY 4.9m 3.8 12.0 0.6% −0.85 +3.21 92%

NFO (H)
BHA (A)
NEW (H)
TOT (A)
LIV (H)

11 Chris Richards 12.0

DEF vs CRY · 4.9m · 0.6% 92%

Proj edge: −0.85
Own edge: +3.21
Pts: 3.8

Against Riccardo Calafiori

NFO (H)
BHA (A)
NEW (H)
TOT (A)
LIV (H)

12 Jarrad Branthwaite DEF vs EVE 5.5m 3.6 12.0 2.4% −0.85 +3.10 92%

HUL (A)
CHE (H)
ARS (A)
!
COV (H)

12 Jarrad Branthwaite 12.0

DEF vs EVE · 5.5m · 2.4% 92%

Proj edge: −0.85
Own edge: +3.10
Pts: 3.6

Against Riccardo Calafiori

HUL (A)
CHE (H)
ARS (A)
!
COV (H)

13 Ethan Ampadu MID vs LEE 5.4m 3.4 11.9 0.9% −0.37 +2.43 92%

ARS (A)
MUN (H)
SUN (A)
BOU (A)
TOT (H)

13 Ethan Ampadu 11.9

MID vs LEE · 5.4m · 0.9% 92%

Proj edge: −0.37
Own edge: +2.43
Pts: 3.4

Against Morgan Rogers

ARS (A)
MUN (H)
SUN (A)
BOU (A)
TOT (H)

14 Sven Botman DEF vs NEW 5.0m 3.5 11.9 0.7% −1.00 +3.21 92%

COV (A)
AVL (H)
CRY (A)
!
FUL (A)

14 Sven Botman 11.9

DEF vs NEW · 5.0m · 0.7% 92%

Proj edge: −1.00
Own edge: +3.21
Pts: 3.5

Against Riccardo Calafiori

COV (A)
AVL (H)
CRY (A)
!
FUL (A)

15 James Hill DEF vs BOU 5.5m 3.4 11.7 0.8% −1.15 +3.20 92%

CHE (A)
SUN (H)
MUN (A)
LEE (H)
IPS (A)

15 James Hill 11.7

DEF vs BOU · 5.5m · 0.8% 92%

Proj edge: −1.15
Own edge: +3.20
Pts: 3.4

Against Riccardo Calafiori

CHE (A)
SUN (H)
MUN (A)
LEE (H)
IPS (A)

16 Oli McBurnie FWD vs HUL 5.5m 3.6 11.7 1.9% −4.91 +5.99 92%

EVE (H)
FUL (A)
BRE (H)
IPS (H)
ARS (A)

16 Oli McBurnie 11.7

FWD vs HUL · 5.5m · 1.9% 92%

Proj edge: −4.91
Own edge: +5.99
Pts: 3.6

Against Erling Haaland

EVE (H)
FUL (A)
BRE (H)
IPS (H)
ARS (A)

17 Bernd Leno GKP vs FUL 4.5m 3.3 11.7 3.4% −1.56 +2.58 92%

IPS (A)
HUL (H)
COV (A)
AVL (A)
NEW (H)

17 Bernd Leno 11.7

GKP vs FUL · 4.5m · 3.4% 92%

Proj edge: −1.56
Own edge: +2.58
Pts: 3.3

Against David Raya Martín

IPS (A)
HUL (H)
COV (A)
AVL (A)
NEW (H)

18 Emersonn FWD vs IPS 5.5m 3.6 11.6 3.5% −5.02 +5.86 92%

FUL (H)
MCI (A)
NFO (H)
HUL (A)
BOU (H)

18 Emersonn 11.6

FWD vs IPS · 5.5m · 3.5% 92%

Proj edge: −5.02
Own edge: +5.86
Pts: 3.6

Against Erling Haaland

FUL (H)
MCI (A)
NFO (H)
HUL (A)
BOU (H)

19 Evanilson FWD vs BOU 6.0m 3.4 11.5 3.2% −5.07 +5.88 92%

CHE (A)
SUN (H)
MUN (A)
LEE (H)
IPS (A)

19 Evanilson 11.5

FWD vs BOU · 6.0m · 3.2% 92%

Proj edge: −5.07
Own edge: +5.88
Pts: 3.4

Against Erling Haaland

CHE (A)
SUN (H)
MUN (A)
LEE (H)
IPS (A)

20 Kristoffer Ajer DEF vs BRE 4.5m 3.4 11.5 3.9% −1.33 +3.00 92%

AVL (A)
LIV (H)
HUL (A)
NFO (H)
BHA (A)

20 Kristoffer Ajer 11.5

DEF vs BRE · 4.5m · 3.9% 92%

Proj edge: −1.33
Own edge: +3.00
Pts: 3.4

Against Riccardo Calafiori

AVL (A)
LIV (H)
HUL (A)
NFO (H)
BHA (A)

21 Elliot Anderson MID vs MCI 6.3m 3.2 11.4 4.0% −0.82 +2.24 92%

LIV (A)
IPS (H)
AVL (A)
BHA (H)
NFO (A)

21 Elliot Anderson 11.4

MID vs MCI · 6.3m · 4.0% 92%

Proj edge: −0.82
Own edge: +2.24
Pts: 3.2

Against Morgan Rogers

LIV (A)
IPS (H)
AVL (A)
BHA (H)
NFO (A)

22 Youri Tielemans MID vs MUN 5.8m 3.5 11.4 1.5% −0.87 +2.39 92%

TOT (H)
LEE (A)
BOU (H)
CHE (A)
AVL (H)

22 Youri Tielemans 11.4

MID vs MUN · 5.8m · 1.5% 92%

Proj edge: −0.87
Own edge: +2.39
Pts: 3.5

Against Morgan Rogers

TOT (H)
LEE (A)
BOU (H)
CHE (A)
AVL (H)

23 James Justin DEF vs LEE 4.5m 3.2 11.4 1.4% −1.50 +3.16 92%

ARS (A)
MUN (H)
SUN (A)
BOU (A)
TOT (H)

23 James Justin 11.4

DEF vs LEE · 4.5m · 1.4% 92%

Proj edge: −1.50
Own edge: +3.16
Pts: 3.2

Against Riccardo Calafiori

ARS (A)
MUN (H)
SUN (A)
BOU (A)
TOT (H)

24 Adrien Truffert DEF vs BOU 5.4m 3.3 11.3 3.0% −1.53 +3.06 92%

CHE (A)
SUN (H)
MUN (A)
LEE (H)
IPS (A)

24 Adrien Truffert 11.3

DEF vs BOU · 5.4m · 3.0% 92%

Proj edge: −1.53
Own edge: +3.06
Pts: 3.3

Against Riccardo Calafiori

CHE (A)
SUN (H)
MUN (A)
LEE (H)
IPS (A)

25 Alex Iwobi MID vs FUL 5.4m 3.3 11.3 0.7% −0.98 +2.44 92%

IPS (A)
HUL (H)
COV (A)
AVL (A)
NEW (H)

25 Alex Iwobi 11.3

MID vs FUL · 5.4m · 0.7% 92%

Proj edge: −0.98
Own edge: +2.44
Pts: 3.3

Against Morgan Rogers

IPS (A)
HUL (H)
COV (A)
AVL (A)
NEW (H)

26 Emiliano Buendía Stati MID vs AVL 5.9m 3.4 11.3 1.0% −0.98 +2.42 92%

BRE (H)
NEW (A)
MCI (H)
FUL (H)
MUN (A)

26 Emiliano Buendía Stati 11.3

MID vs AVL · 5.9m · 1.0% 92%

Proj edge: −0.98
Own edge: +2.42
Pts: 3.4

Against Morgan Rogers

BRE (H)
NEW (A)
MCI (H)
FUL (H)
MUN (A)

27 Luka Vušković DEF vs BHA 5.0m 3.1 11.2 3.7% −1.67 +3.01 92%

SUN (A)
CRY (H)
LIV (A)
MCI (A)
BRE (H)

27 Luka Vušković 11.2

DEF vs BHA · 5.0m · 3.7% 92%

Proj edge: −1.67
Own edge: +3.01
Pts: 3.1

Against Riccardo Calafiori

SUN (A)
CRY (H)
LIV (A)
MCI (A)
BRE (H)

28 Julio Enciso MID vs IPS 5.5m 3.5 11.2 0.8% −1.10 +2.43 92%

FUL (H)
MCI (A)
NFO (H)
HUL (A)
BOU (H)

28 Julio Enciso 11.2

MID vs IPS · 5.5m · 0.8% 92%

Proj edge: −1.10
Own edge: +2.43
Pts: 3.5

Against Morgan Rogers

FUL (H)
MCI (A)
NFO (H)
HUL (A)
BOU (H)

29 Nordi Mukiele DEF vs SUN 5.4m 3.2 11.1 1.9% −1.81 +3.13 75%

BHA (H)
BOU (A)
LEE (H)
COV (A)
CHE (H)

29 Nordi Mukiele 11.1

DEF vs SUN · 5.4m · 1.9% 75%

Proj edge: −1.81
Own edge: +3.13
Pts: 3.2

Against Riccardo Calafiori

BHA (H)
BOU (A)
LEE (H)
COV (A)
CHE (H)

30 Diego Gómez MID vs BHA 5.0m 3.2 11.0 4.0% −1.23 +2.24 92%

SUN (A)
CRY (H)
LIV (A)
MCI (A)
BRE (H)

30 Diego Gómez 11.0

MID vs BHA · 5.0m · 4.0% 92%

Proj edge: −1.23
Own edge: +2.24
Pts: 3.2

Against Morgan Rogers

SUN (A)
CRY (H)
LIV (A)
MCI (A)
BRE (H)

31 Jay Dasilva DEF vs COV 4.0m 3.7 11.0 0.7% −1.86 +3.21 92%

NEW (H)
TOT (A)
FUL (H)
SUN (H)
EVE (A)

31 Jay Dasilva 11.0

DEF vs COV · 4.0m · 0.7% 92%

Proj edge: −1.86
Own edge: +3.21
Pts: 3.7

Against Riccardo Calafiori

NEW (H)
TOT (A)
FUL (H)
SUN (H)
EVE (A)

32 Keane Lewis-Potter MID vs BRE 5.5m 3.3 11.0 1.7% −1.24 +2.38 92%

AVL (A)
LIV (H)
HUL (A)
NFO (H)
BHA (A)

32 Keane Lewis-Potter 11.0

MID vs BRE · 5.5m · 1.7% 92%

Proj edge: −1.24
Own edge: +2.38
Pts: 3.3

Against Morgan Rogers

AVL (A)
LIV (H)
HUL (A)
NFO (H)
BHA (A)

33 Dara O'Shea DEF vs IPS 4.0m 3.4 10.9 2.7% −1.99 +3.08 92%

FUL (H)
MCI (A)
NFO (H)
HUL (A)
BOU (H)

33 Dara O'Shea 10.9

DEF vs IPS · 4.0m · 2.7% 92%

Proj edge: −1.99
Own edge: +3.08
Pts: 3.4

Against Riccardo Calafiori

FUL (H)
MCI (A)
NFO (H)
HUL (A)
BOU (H)

34 Carl Rushworth GKP vs COV 4.5m 3.4 10.8 0.8% −2.48 +2.75 92%

NEW (H)
TOT (A)
FUL (H)
SUN (H)
EVE (A)

34 Carl Rushworth 10.8

GKP vs COV · 4.5m · 0.8% 92%

Proj edge: −2.48
Own edge: +2.75
Pts: 3.4

Against David Raya Martín

NEW (H)
TOT (A)
FUL (H)
SUN (H)
EVE (A)

35 Rayan MID vs BOU 6.3m 3.1 10.7 1.6% −1.52 +2.38 92%

CHE (A)
SUN (H)
MUN (A)
LEE (H)
IPS (A)

35 Rayan 10.7

MID vs BOU · 6.3m · 1.6% 92%

Proj edge: −1.52
Own edge: +2.38
Pts: 3.1

Against Morgan Rogers

CHE (A)
SUN (H)
MUN (A)
LEE (H)
IPS (A)

36 Sandro Tonali MID vs TOT 5.3m 3.0 10.7 1.8% −1.53 +2.37 92%

MUN (A)
COV (H)
CHE (A)
CRY (H)
LEE (A)

36 Sandro Tonali 10.7

MID vs TOT · 5.3m · 1.8% 92%

Proj edge: −1.53
Own edge: +2.37
Pts: 3.0

Against Morgan Rogers

MUN (A)
COV (H)
CHE (A)
CRY (H)
LEE (A)

37 Đorđe Petrović GKP vs BOU 4.5m 3.1 10.7 3.0% −2.48 +2.60 92%

CHE (A)
SUN (H)
MUN (A)
LEE (H)
IPS (A)

37 Đorđe Petrović 10.7

GKP vs BOU · 4.5m · 3.0% 92%

Proj edge: −2.48
Own edge: +2.60
Pts: 3.1

Against David Raya Martín

CHE (A)
SUN (H)
MUN (A)
LEE (H)
IPS (A)

38 Adam Wharton MID vs CRY 5.4m 3.2 10.6 0.7% −1.66 +2.44 92%

NFO (H)
BHA (A)
NEW (H)
TOT (A)
LIV (H)

38 Adam Wharton 10.6

MID vs CRY · 5.4m · 0.7% 92%

Proj edge: −1.66
Own edge: +2.44
Pts: 3.2

Against Morgan Rogers

NFO (H)
BHA (A)
NEW (H)
TOT (A)
LIV (H)

39 Quinten Timber MID vs CRY 5.0m 3.2 10.6 0.0% −1.67 +2.48 88%

NFO (H)
BHA (A)
NEW (H)
TOT (A)
LIV (H)

39 Quinten Timber 10.6

MID vs CRY · 5.0m · 0.0% 88%

Proj edge: −1.67
Own edge: +2.48
Pts: 3.2

Against Morgan Rogers

NFO (H)
BHA (A)
NEW (H)
TOT (A)
LIV (H)

40 Daichi Kamada MID vs CRY 5.0m 3.2 10.6 0.5% −1.68 +2.45 92%

NFO (H)
BHA (A)
NEW (H)
TOT (A)
LIV (H)

40 Daichi Kamada 10.6

MID vs CRY · 5.0m · 0.5% 92%

Proj edge: −1.68
Own edge: +2.45
Pts: 3.2

Against Morgan Rogers

NFO (H)
BHA (A)
NEW (H)
TOT (A)
LIV (H)

each row's Ahead, drawn to scale every bar on one axis of 0 to 20

What an edge is here, and what it is measured against

Every row is owned by under 5% of the game. The threshold is the page's premise rather than a sort: the ranking under it is the weighted score for the rounds ahead, which is a unit this model is measured in.

The two edge columns are one figure split in two, under the rule this app already trades points against ownership by — points times one minus 0.5 times ownership, which is the captain shortlist's own aggressive setting. They add up to the whole edge exactly, so a reader can check the pair rather than trust it.

The template is the most-owned player the game has in that position, taken off the whole board rather than off the filtered rows — a differential is measured against the field, not against the least contrarian row left on the screen. A position the game has published nobody's ownership for has no template, and both columns print a dash rather than a nought.

The minutes floor is the projection's own start probability at 45%. It is the largest way a list like this goes wrong, so it is a gate rather than a column — and nothing on this site backtests the ownership half of the split.

A player the game has published no ownership figure for is left off rather than counted as owned by nobody. Missing is not nought, and the one place that mistake does the most damage is a board about ownership.

Every ranking here is in expected points or in the weighted score for the rounds ahead, which are the units this model is measured in. The value column is those figures restated over a price — it is a way of scanning the board, and nothing on this site backtests it.

Bonus points are projected nowhere on this site, so they are in none of these figures.

The board is every player the game would let you field, the flagged included — whether a doubtful player is worth picking is a judgement the projection makes with his published chance of playing, not one made by hiding him.

What is measured here, and what is not

Measured The projected points

Replayed against gameweek 2 after it was played: an average miss of 1.617 points a player, against 1.842 for “predict what he has averaged so far”, over 456 players. Recorded Sunday, 6 September 2026 and refreshed by hand, so the date is part of the claim.