Hellas Verona'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, 3 draws, 2 losses
3 pts 2–5 goals −3 GD
Chances
- Provider xG / xGA
- 3.72 – 10.06
- 0.74 – 2.01 per match
- xGD
- -6.34
- -1.27 per match
- xG record
- 0 with the chances, 1 with even chances, 4 against them
Comparable xG: 5 of 5 completed results.
Points vs xPts Model
3 pts 3.2 xPts
−0.2 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 · Serie A · All venues
Hellas Verona's winless run follows chances that have gone against them at both ends. They out-created the opponent in 1 of 5 matches, for −6.34 xG difference overall on 3.72–10.06. Their points total of 3 lands on the model's 3.2 xPts, so the results have followed the chances closely.
Points minus xPts, match by match
Over these 5 results Hellas Verona are 0.25 points below their xPts. The gap was widest at -0.55, against Como on Sun 10/05.
- Points
- 3
- xPts
- 3.25
- Gap
- -0.25
- This match
- Match gap
- Running gap
| Date | Opponent | Points | xPts | Match gap | Running gap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 25/04 | Lecce | 1 | 0.88 | +0.12 | +0.12 |
| Sun 03/05 | Juventus | 1 | 0.12 | +0.88 | +1.00 |
| Sun 10/05 | Como | 0 | 1.55 | -1.55 | -0.55 |
| Sun 17/05 | Inter | 1 | 0.53 | +0.47 | -0.08 |
| Sun 24/05 | Roma | 0 | 0.17 | -0.17 | -0.25 |
Scores and xG
Hellas Verona first
-
Match analysis →
Why this label · Roma, 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
- 0.17
- Points minus xPts
- -0.17
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 · Inter, Sun 17/05
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
- 0.53
- Points minus xPts
- +0.47
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 · Como, Sun 10/05
The team lost, while the chance difference was approximately even. The outcome was weaker than that difference alone 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
- 1.55
- Points minus xPts
- -1.55
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 · Juventus, Sun 03/05
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
- 0.12
- Points minus xPts
- +0.88
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 · Lecce, Sat 25/04
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
- 0.88
- Points minus xPts
- +0.12
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
Juventus 1:1
· Away xG / xGA 0.30 – 2.60
- Goal difference
- 0
- xGD
- -2.30
- GD minus xGD
- +2.30
Among 5 comparable results.
Open match →
Biggest underperformance
Como 0:1
· Home xG / xGA 1.07 – 0.85
- Goal difference
- -1
- xGD
- +0.22
- GD minus xGD
- -1.22
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.