Skip to content
Compare Broxburn Ath. vs Bo'ness Utd

Broxburn Ath. vs Bo'ness Utd Head-to-Head Stats and Form Comparison

Compare Broxburn Ath. vs Bo'ness Utd: head-to-head stats, recent form, goals, defensive record and strength indicators from last matches.

Broxburn Ath. Broxburn Ath. Home Team
Bo'ness Utd Bo'ness Utd Away Team
Broxburn Ath.
33.6
D W W L D L D L D D

Last 10 Matches

Bo'ness Utd
38.7
D W W L W L D D L D

Performance Radar

Broxburn Ath.
Bo'ness Utd

Categories Won

4

Broxburn Ath.

2

Draw

9

Bo'ness Utd

Statistical Comparison

Win Percentage
20%

2W, 5D, 3L

30%

3W, 4D, 3L

Goals Scored / Match
1.6

16 / 10 matches

1.7

17 / 10 matches

Goals Conceded / Match
2.3

23 / 10 matches

1.7

17 / 10 matches

Goal Difference
-7

-7

0

0

Clean Sheet
20%

2 / 10 matches

10%

1 / 10 matches

Over 2.5 Goals
80%

8 / 10 matches

60%

6 / 10 matches

Both Teams to Score
60%

6 / 10 matches

80%

8 / 10 matches

Top Scorer
Q. Mitchell (3 goals)
K. Mitchell (7 goals)
Most Goals by Half
1st Half: 5 / 2nd Half: 11
1st Half: 5 / 2nd Half: 12
Home Win Rate
20%

1W / 5 matches

50%

2W / 4 matches

Away Win Rate
20%

1W / 5 matches

17%

1W / 6 matches

Schedule Strength (SoS)
34.6

League Difficulty: 25.0, Opponent Quality: 41.0

31.5

League Difficulty: 25.0, Opponent Quality: 35.9

Elite Opponent Record
0%

0W / 0 matches

0%

0W / 0 matches

Expected Goals (xG)
1.26

Actual: 1.6 | Diff: +0.34

1.38

Actual: 1.7 | Diff: +0.32

Adjusted Power Rating
33.6

Attack: 45.1, Defense: 19.7, Form: 16.9

38.7

Attack: 46.2, Defense: 35.3, Form: 24.4

Goal Timing Analysis

1

0-15'

1

16-30'

2
2

31-45'

3
6

46-60'

5
2

61-75'

3
4

76-90+'

4
Broxburn Ath.
Bo'ness Utd
Broxburn Ath.

Power Rating Breakdown

33.6

Overall

Attack 45.1
Defense 19.7
Form 16.9
Consistency 67.3
Bo'ness Utd

Power Rating Breakdown

38.7

Overall

Attack 46.2
Defense 35.3
Form 24.4
Consistency 57.7

Strength of Schedule

Measures the difficulty of opponents faced. Higher = tougher schedule.

League Difficulty

25.0 vs 25.0

Opponent Quality

41.0 vs 35.9

Elite Opponent Record

0% vs 0%
Broxburn Ath. logo Broxburn Ath.
D
Dunipace (25%)
W
Cowdenbeath (39%)
W
Lochee Utd (31%)
L
Tranent (55%)
D
Bonnyrigg RA (48%)
L
Clydebank (63%)
D
Cumbernauld C. (38%)
L
Linlithgow (38%)
Bo'ness Utd logo Bo'ness Utd
D
Musselburgh (30%)
W
Strollers (25%)
W
Gala (32%)
L
Berwick (40%)
W
Cumbernauld C. (38%)
L
Gala (32%)
D
Tranent (55%)
D
Cowdenbeath (34%)

Opponent Quality: Quality blends league strength, recent points form, goal difference, and home/away context. It is not only club size or reputation.

Opponent Breakdown
Opponent Breakdown
Score
Opp. Quality
Dunipace A
2 - 2 D
25%
Cowdenbeath A
2 - 0 W
39%
Lochee Utd H
3 - 0 W
31%
Tranent A
0 - 3 L
55%
Bonnyrigg RA H
2 - 2 D
48%
Clydebank A
0 - 4 L
63%
Cumbernauld C. H
3 - 3 D
38%
Linlithgow H
1 - 6 L
38%
Braves A
1 - 1 D
48%
Strollers H
2 - 2 D
25%
Opponent Breakdown
Opponent Breakdown
Score
Opp. Quality
Musselburgh A
2 - 2 D
30%
Strollers H
2 - 0 W
25%
Gala A
3 - 1 W
32%
Berwick A
2 - 4 L
40%
Cumbernauld C. H
3 - 2 W
38%
Gala A
1 - 3 L
32%
Tranent A
1 - 1 D
55%
Cowdenbeath H
1 - 1 D
34%
Strollers A
0 - 1 L
30%
Celtic H
2 - 2 D
43%

AI Analysis

The statistics point to a clear direction in this matchup, though the underdog should not be underestimated. When we factor in the quality of opponents each team has faced, the gap narrows slightly but the overall picture remains consistent.

Both teams have faced similar levels of opposition (SoS: 34.6 vs 31.5), making the raw statistics a reliable comparison tool in this matchup.

The attacking output of Broxburn Ath. and Bo'ness Utd is virtually identical, with both sides posting averages of 1.6 and 1.7 goals per game respectively.

Bo'ness Utd has the defensive edge, conceding 1.7 per match compared to Broxburn Ath.'s 2.3.

Broxburn Ath. has not faced any elite-level opponents in their recent matches, making it difficult to assess their ceiling.

Bo'ness Utd has not faced any elite-level opponents in their recent matches, making it difficult to assess their ceiling.

Crunching the numbers, this match averages out to 3.6 total goals. Going Over 2.5 carries the stronger statistical case, with the BTTS market looking likely given current form.

❄️ Form Momentum: Broxburn Ath. is struggling for form, winning just 2 of their last 10 matches. Teams in this state often lack the confidence to compete in tight moments.

⚠️ Risk Factor: Despite being the statistical favorite, Bo'ness Utd faces a key vulnerability: their defense concedes 1.7 goals per match. If Broxburn Ath. can exploit this, an upset becomes plausible.

💡 Why This Matters: The 5.1-point power rating gap between these teams translates to approximately a 63% win probability for Bo'ness Utd. In practical terms, Bo'ness Utd would win 6 out of 10 such matchups.

The numbers lean toward Bo'ness Utd, with a 5.1-point power rating gap pointing to a genuine advantage — though not one that makes this contest a formality.

Match Simulator

AI-powered match simulation based on real statistics

Broxburn Ath.

Broxburn Ath.

VS
Bo'ness Utd

Bo'ness Utd

In H2H (head-to-head) matchups, to eliminate momentary fluctuations and coincidences, we limit our analyses to an optimal depth of exactly 10 matches. Neither less, nor more. This focused approach is our undisputed gold standard, revealing the tactical and psychological supremacy teams hold over each other in its purest form. We do not dwell on the noise of the past; we concentrate on the millimetric precision of current form.

Compare Another Pair

Comparison Summary

This head-to-head comparison analyzes the last 10 matches of each team, evaluating attack power, defensive strength, form consistency, and overall performance metrics. The power ratings are calculated using a weighted algorithm that considers goals scored, goals conceded, win rate, and recent form trends.

Broxburn Ath.

2W 5D 3L · 16 goals scored · 23 conceded

Bo'ness Utd

3W 4D 3L · 17 goals scored · 17 conceded

Popular Teams

We use cookies & local storage to enhance your experience. Learn more

Login / Register

5 + 2 = ?
or