Everton's recorded results for 2025/2026, newest first, with the available xG behind each score. Compare outcomes with the chances created and conceded, then open a match for more detail.
Results
- Wins – draws – losses (W–D–L)
- 0 wins, 2 draws, 3 losses
2 pts 5–9 goals −4 GD
Chances
- Provider xG / xGA
- 6.03 – 10.31
- 1.21 – 2.06 per match
- xGD
- -4.28
- -0.86 per match
- xG record
- 1 with the chances, 0 with even chances, 4 against them
Comparable xG: 5 of 5 completed results.
Points vs xPts Model
2 pts 4.1 xPts
−2.1 vs xPts
Matched xPts: 5 of 5 selected results.
Model · How xPts works →Match points use 3 for a win, 1 for a draw and 0 for a loss, before deductions or sanctions.
Points vs xPts uses only matches with available xPts on both sides of the comparison.
What the results say
Last 5 · All competitions · Away
Everton's winless run follows chances that have gone against them at both ends. They out-created the opponent in 1 of 5 matches, for −4.28 xG difference overall on 6.03–10.31. Their points total of 2 sits 2.1 below the model's 4.1 xPts, so the chances have clearly outrun the results.
Points minus xPts, match by match
Over these 5 results Everton are 2.06 points below their xPts.
- Points
- 2
- xPts
- 4.06
- Gap
- -2.06
- This match
- Match gap
- Running gap
| Date | Opponent | Points | xPts | Match gap | Running gap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 14/03 | Arsenal | 0 | 0.44 | -0.44 | -0.44 |
| Sat 11/04 | Brentford | 1 | 0.61 | +0.39 | -0.05 |
| Sat 25/04 | West Ham United | 0 | 1.60 | -1.60 | -1.65 |
| Sun 10/05 | Crystal Palace | 1 | 0.77 | +0.23 | -1.42 |
| Sun 24/05 | Tottenham Hotspur | 0 | 0.64 | -0.64 | -2.06 |
Scores and xG
Everton first
-
Match analysis →
Why this label · Tottenham Hotspur, Sun 24/05
The team lost and recorded less xG than its opponent. The direction of the result aligns with the chance difference.
An xGD of at least +0.25 is positive; at most −0.25 is negative; between them is approximately even. The band uses unrounded figures and is an editorial guide, not a statistical confidence threshold. The chip on each result reads one of three ways: backed by the chances, with even chances, or against them. Counted over the selection, those three are the xG record on the Chances card — 5–1–0 reads as five results with the chances, one even and none against them.
- Points
- 0
- Post-match model xPts
- 0.64
- Points minus xPts
- -0.64
xPts is our post-match model's 3 × win probability + draw probability using the match's provider xG, not a pre-match forecast.
Learn how xG and xPts are calculated → -
Match analysis →
Why this label · Crystal Palace, Sun 10/05
The match was drawn although the team recorded less xG. The outcome was stronger than that chance difference suggests.
An xGD of at least +0.25 is positive; at most −0.25 is negative; between them is approximately even. The band uses unrounded figures and is an editorial guide, not a statistical confidence threshold. The chip on each result reads one of three ways: backed by the chances, with even chances, or against them. Counted over the selection, those three are the xG record on the Chances card — 5–1–0 reads as five results with the chances, one even and none against them.
- Points
- 1
- Post-match model xPts
- 0.77
- Points minus xPts
- +0.23
xPts is our post-match model's 3 × win probability + draw probability using the match's provider xG, not a pre-match forecast.
Learn how xG and xPts are calculated → -
Match analysis →
Why this label · West Ham United, Sat 25/04
The team lost despite recording a positive xG difference. The outcome was weaker than that chance advantage suggests.
An xGD of at least +0.25 is positive; at most −0.25 is negative; between them is approximately even. The band uses unrounded figures and is an editorial guide, not a statistical confidence threshold. The chip on each result reads one of three ways: backed by the chances, with even chances, or against them. Counted over the selection, those three are the xG record on the Chances card — 5–1–0 reads as five results with the chances, one even and none against them.
- Points
- 0
- Post-match model xPts
- 1.60
- Points minus xPts
- -1.60
xPts is our post-match model's 3 × win probability + draw probability using the match's provider xG, not a pre-match forecast.
Learn how xG and xPts are calculated → -
Match analysis →
Why this label · Brentford, Sat 11/04
The match was drawn although the team recorded less xG. The outcome was stronger than that chance difference suggests.
An xGD of at least +0.25 is positive; at most −0.25 is negative; between them is approximately even. The band uses unrounded figures and is an editorial guide, not a statistical confidence threshold. The chip on each result reads one of three ways: backed by the chances, with even chances, or against them. Counted over the selection, those three are the xG record on the Chances card — 5–1–0 reads as five results with the chances, one even and none against them.
- Points
- 1
- Post-match model xPts
- 0.62
- Points minus xPts
- +0.38
xPts is our post-match model's 3 × win probability + draw probability using the match's provider xG, not a pre-match forecast.
Learn how xG and xPts are calculated → -
Match analysis →
Why this label · Arsenal, Sat 14/03
The team lost and recorded less xG than its opponent. The direction of the result aligns with the chance difference.
An xGD of at least +0.25 is positive; at most −0.25 is negative; between them is approximately even. The band uses unrounded figures and is an editorial guide, not a statistical confidence threshold. The chip on each result reads one of three ways: backed by the chances, with even chances, or against them. Counted over the selection, those three are the xG record on the Chances card — 5–1–0 reads as five results with the chances, one even and none against them.
- Points
- 0
- Post-match model xPts
- 0.44
- Points minus xPts
- -0.44
xPts is our post-match model's 3 × win probability + draw probability using the match's provider xG, not a pre-match forecast.
Learn how xG and xPts are calculated →
Biggest overperformance
Brentford 2:2
· Away xG / xGA 1.53 – 2.84
- Goal difference
- 0
- xGD
- -1.31
- GD minus xGD
- +1.31
Among 5 comparable results.
Open match →
Biggest underperformance
West Ham United 1:2
· Away xG / xGA 1.45 – 1.17
- Goal difference
- -1
- xGD
- +0.28
- GD minus xGD
- -1.28
Among 5 comparable results.
Open match →
Reading these results
xG is the provider's estimate of chances created; xGA is the opponent's xG. xGD is the difference. Labels compare the recorded outcome with those chances; they are interpretations, not judgments about fairness.
xPts is our post-match model's 3 × win probability + draw probability using the match's provider xG, not a pre-match forecast.
How each figure on this page is read
Every xG bar is drawn on one fixed scale: full width is 7.20 xG, the same on every card and in every window, so two cards can be compared by eye. A rarer match above that is capped with a hatched end, and the figure beside the bar still gives its value.
An xGD of at least +0.25 is positive; at most −0.25 is negative; between them is approximately even. The band uses unrounded figures and is an editorial guide, not a statistical confidence threshold. The chip on each result reads one of three ways: backed by the chances, with even chances, or against them. Counted over the selection, those three are the xG record on the Chances card — 5–1–0 reads as five results with the chances, one even and none against them.
Goal difference minus xGD says how far a scoreline finished from the chances behind it: a 4:2 won off level chances ran nearly two goals ahead of them. The two callouts under the list name the match that ran furthest each way, and a direction with no result a full goal clear of the chances gets no card rather than a card built from a rounding.
Windows count back from the most recent recorded match, and only matches attached to this club record are included. Home and away mean the provider-designated side, not a verified physical venue. Scores describe recorded play, not shootout advancement. Unverified periods receive no chance comparison.