Skip to content
Compare Chicago vs Cincinnati

Chicago vs Cincinnati Head-to-Head Stats and Form Comparison

Compare Chicago vs Cincinnati: head-to-head stats, recent form, goals, defensive record and strength indicators from last matches.

Chicago Chicago Home Team
Cincinnati Cincinnati Away Team
Chicago
56.9
D W W W L L W W W L

Last 10 Matches

Cincinnati
55.2
D W D W L W W D L D

Performance Radar

Chicago
Cincinnati

Categories Won

7

Chicago

3

Draw

5

Cincinnati

Statistical Comparison

Win Percentage
60%

6W, 1D, 3L

40%

4W, 4D, 2L

Goals Scored / Match
1.8

18 / 10 matches

2.7

27 / 10 matches

Goals Conceded / Match
1.5

15 / 10 matches

2.2

22 / 10 matches

Goal Difference
+3

+3

+5

+5

Clean Sheet
10%

1 / 10 matches

0%

0 / 10 matches

Over 2.5 Goals
80%

8 / 10 matches

80%

8 / 10 matches

Both Teams to Score
90%

9 / 10 matches

100%

10 / 10 matches

Top Scorer
R. Lod (3 goals)
Evander (8 goals)
Most Goals by Half
1st Half: 9 / 2nd Half: 9
1st Half: 14 / 2nd Half: 13
Home Win Rate
75%

3W / 4 matches

67%

4W / 6 matches

Away Win Rate
50%

3W / 6 matches

0%

0W / 4 matches

Schedule Strength (SoS)
54.0

League Difficulty: 55.0, Opponent Quality: 53.3

52.2

League Difficulty: 55.0, Opponent Quality: 50.4

Elite Opponent Record
0%

0W / 0 matches

0%

0W / 0 matches

Expected Goals (xG)
1.83

Actual: 1.8 | Diff: -0.03

2.54

Actual: 2.7 | Diff: +0.16

Adjusted Power Rating
56.9

Attack: 62.4, Defense: 52.0, Form: 62.4

55.2

Attack: 92.0, Defense: 27.3, Form: 40.9

Goal Timing Analysis

4

0-15'

4
4

16-30'

3
1

31-45'

6

46-60'

6
7

61-75'

1
2

76-90+'

7
Chicago
Cincinnati
Chicago

Power Rating Breakdown

56.9

Overall

Attack 62.4
Defense 52.0
Form 62.4
Consistency 43.3
Cincinnati

Power Rating Breakdown

55.2

Overall

Attack 92.0
Defense 27.3
Form 40.9
Consistency 56.8

Strength of Schedule

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

League Difficulty

55.0 vs 55.0

Opponent Quality

53.3 vs 50.4

Elite Opponent Record

0% vs 0%
Chicago logo Chicago
D
New York (54%)
W
Orlando (54%)
W
Portland (53%)
W
Charlotte (58%)
L
NYCFC (58%)
L
Inter Miami (65%)
W
Toronto (44%)
W
Montréal (50%)
Cincinnati logo Cincinnati
D
Sounders (31%)
W
NYCFC (54%)
D
Orlando (54%)
W
Earthquakes (33%)
L
Columbus (45%)
W
Whitecaps (55%)
W
Orlando (49%)
D
San Diego (59%)

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
New York A
1 - 1 D
54%
Orlando A
2 - 1 W
54%
Portland H
2 - 1 W
53%
Charlotte H
2 - 1 W
58%
NYCFC A
1 - 3 L
58%
Inter Miami A
2 - 3 L
65%
Toronto H
2 - 1 W
44%
Montréal A
2 - 0 W
50%
DC United A
3 - 1 W
48%
New York H
1 - 3 L
49%
Opponent Breakdown
Opponent Breakdown
Score
Opp. Quality
Sounders H
1 - 1 D
31%
NYCFC H
2 - 1 W
54%
Orlando A
1 - 1 D
54%
Earthquakes H
4 - 2 W
33%
Columbus A
1 - 2 L
45%
Whitecaps H
4 - 3 W
55%
Orlando H
6 - 2 W
49%
San Diego A
3 - 3 D
59%
Inter Miami H
3 - 5 L
60%
Charlotte A
2 - 2 D
64%

AI Analysis

Two well-matched sides make for a compelling statistical comparison here. Surface-level metrics only scratch the surface — once we factor in strength of schedule, the analysis gains real depth. The numbers both teams have posted reflect performances against broadly similar competition.

With comparable strength of schedule figures (54.0 vs 52.2), the opposition quality faced by both sides has been largely equivalent, giving these head-to-head stats greater analytical validity.

Cincinnati leads the attacking statistics, averaging 2.7 goals per game compared to Chicago's 1.8 — a meaningful but far from decisive advantage.

Defensively, Chicago holds the advantage — allowing just 1.5 goals per game against Cincinnati's 2.2.

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

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

Chicago has an exceptional home record with a 75% win rate at their home ground. When playing at home, they become significantly more dangerous.

Crunching the numbers, this match averages out to 4.1 total goals. Going Over 2.5 carries the stronger statistical case, with the BTTS market looking likely given current form.

📈 Form Momentum: Chicago has been remarkably consistent, maintaining a steady 1.9 points per game over their last 10 matches. This stability makes them a predictable but reliable force.

📈 Form Momentum: Cincinnati has been remarkably consistent, maintaining a steady 1.6 points per game over their last 10 matches. This stability makes them a predictable but reliable force.

⚠️ Risk Factor: In matches this evenly balanced, the deciding factor often comes down to set pieces and individual errors. Both teams should be wary of complacency in a match where neither side has a clear edge.

💡 Why This Matters: Chicago's superior Strength of Schedule means their statistics were earned against tougher opponents. A team that performs well against strong opposition is more likely to maintain that level in any given match.

This is a genuine coin-flip. Both teams are remarkably evenly matched across all metrics, and the outcome will likely be decided by small margins on the day.

Match Simulator

AI-powered match simulation based on real statistics

Chicago

Chicago

VS
Cincinnati

Cincinnati

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.

Chicago

6W 1D 3L · 18 goals scored · 15 conceded

Cincinnati

4W 4D 2L · 27 goals scored · 22 conceded

Popular Teams

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

Login / Register

5 + 2 = ?
or