Updated daily through the season. Spot something off? Tell usUpdated daily. Tell us
SharpXI©
Track record

How the UEFA Conference League model actually performs

A model is only worth its calibration. Every number below is an out-of-sample prediction for a 25/26 UEFA Conference League fixture, made before kick-off from earlier data only, then checked against what actually happened. No cherry-picking, no hindsight.

Read this first. This page measures two things: whether our probabilities are honest — do the events we call 30% happen about 30% of the time? — and whether the prices we flag as value beat the closing line. It is not a profit record: calibration proves the numbers are sound, closing line value proves they beat the market, and neither is a promise of profit. We grade everything against a baseline so a confident-looking model can't hide.

16,830
predictions graded, out of sample
13/18
markets beat a base-rate baseline
153
25/26 fixtures scored as-of kick-off

Every market — does the model call it straight, and beat guessing?

Two honest questions per market. First, are our percentages true — when we say something happens 30% of the time, does it? The bar shows it: grey is what we said, green is what actually happened; the closer they sit, the straighter the call. Second, is the model genuinely sharper than just predicting the season average for everyone? That's the badge.

✓ Sharp — clearly beats guessing (the model genuinely knows more here).  Slim edge — beats it, but only just; near the base rate.  ≈ No real edge — no better than guessing: the noisiest markets, where even a sharp model has little to add. The % is skill over a base-rate baseline — not a claim about beating a bookmaker. We leave the weak ones in, because a record you only show when it flatters you isn't one.
MarketWe said → it happenedSharper than guessing?
2+ shots
1,185 predictions
said 21%happened 28%
✓ Sharp +22%
3+ shots
1,185 predictions
said 11%happened 13%
✓ Sharp +18%
1+ tackle
1,185 predictions
said 53%happened 61%
✓ Sharp +17%
2+ tackles
1,185 predictions
said 29%happened 32%
✓ Sharp +16%
1+ shot
1,185 predictions
said 42%happened 55%
✓ Sharp +15%
2+ fouls won
1,185 predictions
said 20%happened 20%
✓ Sharp +15%
1+ shot on target
1,185 predictions
said 20%happened 28%
✓ Sharp +12%
2+ fouls committed
1,185 predictions
said 22%happened 25%
✓ Sharp +10%
3+ fouls won
1,185 predictions
said 9%happened 8%
✓ Sharp +10%
2+ shots on target
1,185 predictions
said 6%happened 8%
✓ Sharp +10%
1+ foul won
1,185 predictions
said 45%happened 52%
✓ Sharp +10%
1+ foul committed
1,185 predictions
said 49%happened 56%
✓ Sharp +9%
3+ fouls committed
1,185 predictions
said 9%happened 8%
Slim edge +3%
3+ saves
80 predictions
said 50%happened 38%
✗ No edge
To be carded
1,185 predictions
said 14%happened 16%
✗ No edge
4+ saves
80 predictions
said 33%happened 24%
✗ No edge
5+ saves
80 predictions
said 21%happened 10%
✗ No edge
Team & match markets
Match Over 3.5 cards
17 predictions
said 47%happened 71%
✗ No edge
Show the full numbers — predictions, Brier score, baseline

Brier score measures per-prediction accuracy (lower is better); the baseline is what you'd score by predicting the same base rate for everyone. Skill is how far the model beats that baseline — the maths behind the badge above.

MarketPredictionsModel avg ActualBrierBaseline Skill
To be carded 1,185 14% 16% 0.141 0.136 -4.0%
1+ shot on target 1,185 20% 28% 0.176 0.201 +12.2%
2+ shots on target 1,185 6% 8% 0.065 0.072 +9.8%
1+ shot 1,185 42% 55% 0.209 0.247 +15.4%
2+ shots 1,185 21% 28% 0.159 0.202 +21.6%
3+ shots 1,185 11% 13% 0.095 0.116 +18.1%
1+ foul committed 1,185 49% 56% 0.223 0.246 +9.4%
2+ fouls committed 1,185 22% 25% 0.170 0.190 +10.4%
3+ fouls committed 1,185 9% 8% 0.072 0.074 +3.2%
1+ foul won 1,185 45% 52% 0.225 0.249 +9.8%
2+ fouls won 1,185 20% 20% 0.138 0.163 +15.2%
3+ fouls won 1,185 9% 8% 0.064 0.071 +10.0%
1+ tackle 1,185 53% 61% 0.198 0.238 +16.8%
2+ tackles 1,185 29% 32% 0.184 0.218 +15.6%
3+ saves 80 50% 38% 0.241 0.234 -2.7%
4+ saves 80 33% 24% 0.199 0.181 -9.8%
5+ saves 80 21% 10% 0.104 0.090 -15.3%
Team & match markets
Match Over 3.5 cards 17 47% 71% 0.314 0.208 -51.5%

Calibration, up close

The aggregate can look right while the details are wrong, so here's the finer view. We sort every prediction into groups by how confident the model was — all the ~20% calls, all the ~30% calls, and so on — then check how often each group actually happened. The model is well calibrated when the two line up: when the things it calls 30% happen about 30% of the time. In each row, grey is what the model said and green is what actually happened — the closer they are, the better. Tap any market to open it.

What the model said What actually happened
To be carded
Model saidhow often it happenedActualPicks
6%
12% 492
14%
18% 418
24%
20% 178
34%
20% 70
1+ shot on target
Model saidhow often it happenedActualPicks
4%
7% 341
15%
23% 355
25%
33% 222
35%
51% 142
44%
58% 88
54%
70% 30
2+ shots on target
Model saidhow often it happenedActualPicks
3%
4% 958
15%
21% 164
24%
36% 47
1+ shot
Model saidhow often it happenedActualPicks
1%
8% 112
15%
26% 84
25%
38% 149
35%
51% 188
45%
55% 198
55%
73% 172
65%
81% 159
74%
85% 102
2+ shots
Model saidhow often it happenedActualPicks
4%
7% 402
15%
17% 268
25%
34% 183
35%
45% 148
45%
68% 97
55%
77% 62
3+ shots
Model saidhow often it happenedActualPicks
3%
4% 732
15%
16% 212
25%
31% 124
34%
44% 73
44%
57% 35
1+ foul committed
Model saidhow often it happenedActualPicks
2%
14% 95
26%
35% 79
36%
49% 123
45%
55% 202
55%
63% 264
65%
71% 248
74%
70% 128
2+ fouls committed
Model saidhow often it happenedActualPicks
4%
8% 285
15%
18% 283
25%
26% 272
35%
44% 215
44%
43% 90
54%
64% 33
3+ fouls committed
Model saidhow often it happenedActualPicks
4%
4% 739
14%
12% 318
24%
17% 95
1+ foul won
Model saidhow often it happenedActualPicks
6%
28% 60
16%
19% 83
26%
36% 104
35%
41% 197
45%
47% 220
55%
63% 244
65%
70% 183
74%
86% 74
2+ fouls won
Model saidhow often it happenedActualPicks
5%
5% 363
15%
14% 298
25%
24% 251
34%
35% 156
44%
54% 74
55%
68% 34
3+ fouls won
Model saidhow often it happenedActualPicks
4%
3% 784
14%
11% 260
24%
22% 94
35%
40% 35
1+ tackle
Model saidhow often it happenedActualPicks
2%
14% 101
25%
44% 69
35%
40% 109
45%
50% 125
55%
59% 183
65%
73% 231
75%
83% 246
84%
88% 93
2+ tackles
Model saidhow often it happenedActualPicks
4%
7% 262
15%
18% 170
25%
26% 185
35%
40% 200
45%
53% 182
55%
53% 123
64%
66% 55

Where the model earns its keep

The shots, fouls and tackles markets are the bulk of what the tool prices, and it beats a base-rate baseline by up to 22% on them — scored using only matches played before each game, so nothing is fitted with hindsight. That's most of the board, and the part the tool is built to price.

We show the ones that don’t, too. To be carded, 3+ saves, 4+ saves, 5+ saves and Match Over 3.5 cards came out no better than guessing the league average this season — the noisiest markets on the board, where even a sharp model has little to add. We leave them on the page because a track record you only show when it flatters you isn't one.

Closing line value

Whether our prices beat the market's own closing view is measured across every league at once, not per competition — the Championship has the most legs of any single league and still sits below the sample a closing-line read needs. Pooled, the record covers 3,376 legs.

See the full closing line value record

Method: player markets scored as-of each kick-off using only prior matches (the recency-weighted rate never sees the future); team markets fit on earlier seasons and evaluated on 25/26. Regenerated from source data on 2026-10-14. Full method on the methodology page.

The scoreboard above is free, and it always will be. The paid tool is that same model, pointed at this week's prices — the edge, and the confidence, on every leg.