Skip to content
Compare Gillingham vs Cheltenham

Gillingham vs Cheltenham Head-to-Head Stats and Form Comparison

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

Gillingham Gillingham Home Team
Cheltenham Cheltenham Away Team
Gillingham
36.6
D L L W W L W W L L

Last 10 Matches

Cheltenham
39.4
L W L L W W L L L W

Performance Radar

Gillingham
Cheltenham

Categories Won

3

Gillingham

5

Draw

7

Cheltenham

Statistical Comparison

Win Percentage
40%

4W, 1D, 5L

40%

4W, 0D, 6L

Goals Scored / Match
1.0

10 / 10 matches

1.6

16 / 10 matches

Goals Conceded / Match
1.8

18 / 10 matches

2.0

20 / 10 matches

Goal Difference
-8

-8

-4

-4

Clean Sheet
40%

4 / 10 matches

20%

2 / 10 matches

Over 2.5 Goals
60%

6 / 10 matches

80%

8 / 10 matches

Both Teams to Score
30%

3 / 10 matches

60%

6 / 10 matches

Top Scorer
G. McCleary (2 goals)
G. Miller (4 goals)
Most Goals by Half
1st Half: 1 / 2nd Half: 9
1st Half: 2 / 2nd Half: 14
Home Win Rate
33%

2W / 6 matches

33%

2W / 6 matches

Away Win Rate
50%

2W / 4 matches

50%

2W / 4 matches

Schedule Strength (SoS)
45.9

League Difficulty: 42.5, Opponent Quality: 48.2

43.8

League Difficulty: 42.0, Opponent Quality: 45.0

Elite Opponent Record
0%

0W / 0 matches

0%

0W / 0 matches

Expected Goals (xG)
0.85

Actual: 1.0 | Diff: +0.15

1.52

Actual: 1.6 | Diff: +0.08

Adjusted Power Rating
36.6

Attack: 32.0, Defense: 38.4, Form: 38.4

39.4

Attack: 50.0, Defense: 31.3, Form: 37.5

Goal Timing Analysis

1

0-15'

16-30'

1

31-45'

1
1

46-60'

2

61-75'

1
2

76-90+'

2
Gillingham
Cheltenham
Gillingham

Power Rating Breakdown

36.6

Overall

Attack 32.0
Defense 38.4
Form 38.4
Consistency 39.7
Cheltenham

Power Rating Breakdown

39.4

Overall

Attack 50.0
Defense 31.3
Form 37.5
Consistency 35.2

Strength of Schedule

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

League Difficulty

42.5 vs 42.0

Opponent Quality

48.2 vs 45.0

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%)
Cheltenham logo Cheltenham
L
Swindon (39%)
W
Rotherham (38%)
L
Charlton (49%)
L
MK Dons (41%)
W
Slimbridge (49%)
W
Evesham Utd (43%)
L
Colchester (45%)
L
Bristol R (58%)

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
Swindon A
1 - 2 L
39%
Rotherham H
2 - 1 W
38%
Charlton H
1 - 3 L
49%
MK Dons H
0 - 2 L
41%
Slimbridge A
6 - 1 W
49%
Evesham Utd A
3 - 0 W
43%
Colchester H
1 - 4 L
45%
Bristol R A
0 - 4 L
58%
Tranmere H
1 - 3 L
44%
Newport H
1 - 0 W
44%

AI Analysis

On paper, these teams are closely aligned, and the data backs that up. Raw statistics can be misleading without context, but strength-of-opponent adjustments reinforce just how competitive this matchup is. Neither side has padded their numbers against weak opposition.

The level of competition each team has encountered is broadly aligned (SoS: 45.9 vs 43.8), which adds credibility to any direct statistical comparisons drawn between these two sides.

Cheltenham leads the attacking statistics, averaging 1.6 goals per game compared to Gillingham's 1.0 — a meaningful but far from decisive advantage.

Both defenses are comparable, with Gillingham conceding 1.8 and Cheltenham conceding 2.0 per match.

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

Cheltenham 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 3.2 total goals. Going Over 2.5 carries the stronger statistical case, with the BTTS market looking possible given current form.

⚠️ 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: Gillingham'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.

The data offers no clear edge here. These sides are separated by the finest of margins across every key metric, making the final result almost impossible to call in advance.

Match Simulator

AI-powered match simulation based on real statistics

Gillingham

Gillingham

VS
Cheltenham

Cheltenham

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

Cheltenham

4W 0D 6L · 16 goals scored · 20 conceded

Popular Teams

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

Login / Register

5 + 2 = ?
or