Liverpool'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)
- 1 win, 0 draws, 4 losses
3 pts 8–12 goals −4 GD
Chances
- Provider xG / xGA
- 6.61 – 7.72
- 1.32 – 1.54 per match
- xGD
- -1.11
- -0.22 per match
- xG record
- 2 with the chances, 0 with even chances, 3 against them
Comparable xG: 5 of 5 completed results.
Points vs xPts Model
3 pts 6.4 xPts
−3.4 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 · Premier League · Away
Liverpool's poor return sits behind chances that argue for more. They out-created the opponent in 2 of 5 matches, for −1.11 xG difference overall on 6.61–7.72. Their points total of 3 sits 3.4 below the model's 6.4 xPts, so the chances have clearly outrun the results. The loss against Wolverhampton came with +1.37 xGD.
Points minus xPts, match by match
Over these 5 results Liverpool are 3.42 points below their xPts.
- Points
- 3
- xPts
- 6.42
- Gap
- -3.42
- This match
- Match gap
- Running gap
| Date | Opponent | Points | xPts | Match gap | Running gap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tue 03/03 | Wolverhampton | 0 | 2.45 | -2.45 | -2.45 |
| Sat 21/03 | Brighton & Hove Albion | 0 | 0.54 | -0.54 | -2.99 |
| Sun 19/04 | Everton | 3 | 1.93 | +1.07 | -1.92 |
| Sun 03/05 | Manchester United | 0 | 0.44 | -0.44 | -2.36 |
| Fri 15/05 | Aston Villa | 0 | 1.06 | -1.06 | -3.42 |
Scores and xG
Liverpool first
-
Match analysis →
Why this label · Aston Villa, Fri 15/05
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
- 1.07
- Points minus xPts
- -1.07
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 · Manchester United, Sun 03/05
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
- 0.44
- 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 → -
Match analysis →
Why this label · Everton, Sun 19/04
The team won and had a positive xG difference. The chances support the direction of the result, without making a judgment about fairness.
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
- 3
- Post-match model xPts
- 1.93
- Points minus xPts
- +1.07
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 · Brighton & Hove Albion, Sat 21/03
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
- 0.54
- Points minus xPts
- -0.54
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 · Wolverhampton, Tue 03/03
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
- 2.45
- Points minus xPts
- -2.45
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 underperformance
Wolverhampton 1:2
· Away xG / xGA 1.81 – 0.44
- Goal difference
- -1
- xGD
- +1.37
- GD minus xGD
- -2.37
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.