Skip to content
Compare Gillingham vs Cambridge U

Gillingham vs Cambridge U Head-to-Head Stats and Form Comparison

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

Gillingham Gillingham Home Team
Cambridge U Cambridge U Away Team
Gillingham
36.6
D L L W W L W W L L

Last 10 Matches

Cambridge U
50.1
D W W D D W D W L D

Performance Radar

Gillingham
Cambridge U

Categories Won

3

Gillingham

3

Draw

9

Cambridge U

Statistical Comparison

Win Percentage
40%

4W, 1D, 5L

40%

4W, 5D, 1L

Goals Scored / Match
1.0

10 / 10 matches

1.1

11 / 10 matches

Goals Conceded / Match
1.8

18 / 10 matches

0.6

6 / 10 matches

Goal Difference
-8

-8

+5

+5

Clean Sheet
40%

4 / 10 matches

60%

6 / 10 matches

Over 2.5 Goals
60%

6 / 10 matches

40%

4 / 10 matches

Both Teams to Score
30%

3 / 10 matches

40%

4 / 10 matches

Top Scorer
G. McCleary (2 goals)
B. Knight (4 goals)
Most Goals by Half
1st Half: 1 / 2nd Half: 9
1st Half: 4 / 2nd Half: 7
Home Win Rate
33%

2W / 6 matches

60%

3W / 5 matches

Away Win Rate
50%

2W / 4 matches

20%

1W / 5 matches

Schedule Strength (SoS)
45.9

League Difficulty: 42.5, Opponent Quality: 48.2

44.4

League Difficulty: 43.0, Opponent Quality: 45.4

Elite Opponent Record
0%

0W / 0 matches

0%

0W / 0 matches

Expected Goals (xG)
0.85

Actual: 1.0 | Diff: +0.15

1.06

Actual: 1.1 | Diff: +0.04

Adjusted Power Rating
36.6

Attack: 32.0, Defense: 38.4, Form: 38.4

50.1

Attack: 34.6, Defense: 75.5, Form: 37.8

Goal Timing Analysis

1

0-15'

1

16-30'

31-45'

3
1

46-60'

4

61-75'

2
2

76-90+'

Gillingham
Cambridge U
Gillingham

Power Rating Breakdown

36.6

Overall

Attack 32.0
Defense 38.4
Form 38.4
Consistency 39.7
Cambridge U

Power Rating Breakdown

50.1

Overall

Attack 34.6
Defense 75.5
Form 37.8
Consistency 63.7

Strength of Schedule

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

League Difficulty

42.5 vs 43.0

Opponent Quality

48.2 vs 45.4

Elite Opponent Record

0% vs 0%
Gillingham logo Gillingham
D
Fleetwood (56%)
L
Walsall (36%)
L
Luton (59%)
W
Ebbsfleet (55%)
W
Millwall (47%)
L
Charlton (49%)
W
Dover (36%)
W
Shrewsbury (33%)
Cambridge U logo Cambridge U
D
Bromley (48%)
W
Wigan (36%)
W
Barnet (56%)
D
Norwich (50%)
D
Northampton (39%)
W
Preston (39%)
D
Crewe (51%)
W
Barrow (38%)

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
Fleetwood A
0 - 0 D
56%
Walsall H
0 - 3 L
36%
Luton H
0 - 3 L
59%
Ebbsfleet A
2 - 1 W
55%
Millwall H
1 - 0 W
47%
Charlton H
0 - 1 L
49%
Dover A
3 - 0 W
36%
Shrewsbury H
1 - 0 W
33%
Barnet A
2 - 6 L
60%
Grimsby H
1 - 4 L
51%
Opponent Breakdown
Opponent Breakdown
Score
Opp. Quality
Bromley A
1 - 1 D
48%
Wigan H
3 - 2 W
36%
Barnet H
2 - 1 W
56%
Norwich A
0 - 0 D
50%
Northampton H
0 - 0 D
39%
Preston A
1 - 0 W
39%
Crewe A
0 - 0 D
51%
Barrow H
3 - 0 W
38%
Grimsby H
1 - 2 L
51%
Bromley A
0 - 0 D
46%

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.

The level of competition each team has encountered is broadly aligned (SoS: 45.9 vs 44.4), which adds credibility to any direct statistical comparisons drawn between these two sides.

Both teams are evenly matched in attack, with Gillingham averaging 1.0 and Cambridge U averaging 1.1 goals per match.

The numbers tell a compelling defensive story for Cambridge U — 0.6 goals conceded per game and 6 clean sheets put them well ahead of Gillingham, who give up 1.8 goals per match at the other end.

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

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

Based on the combined statistics, expect 2.2 total goals. Under 2.5 goals is the statistical lean, with BTTS (Both Teams to Score) being unlikely.

📈 Form Momentum: Cambridge U has been remarkably consistent, maintaining a steady 1.7 points per game over their last 10 matches. This stability makes them a predictable but reliable force.

💡 Why This Matters: The 13.5-point power rating gap between these teams translates to approximately a 84% win probability for Cambridge U. In practical terms, Cambridge U would win 8 out of 10 such matchups.

While Cambridge U holds a measurable edge in the adjusted standings, the 13.5-point differential in power ratings indicates a competitive matchup rather than a clear-cut outcome.

Match Simulator

AI-powered match simulation based on real statistics

Gillingham

Gillingham

VS
Cambridge U

Cambridge U

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.

Gillingham

4W 1D 5L · 10 goals scored · 18 conceded

Cambridge U

4W 5D 1L · 11 goals scored · 6 conceded

Popular Teams

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

Login / Register

5 + 2 = ?
or