Skip to content
Compare Hamilton vs QOTS

Hamilton vs QOTS Head-to-Head Stats and Form Comparison

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

Hamilton Hamilton Home Team
QOTS QOTS Away Team
Hamilton
59.9
W L D W W D W W L W

Last 10 Matches

QOTS
47.5
L L W D D D W D D W

Performance Radar

Hamilton
QOTS

Categories Won

7

Hamilton

5

Draw

3

QOTS

Statistical Comparison

Win Percentage
60%

6W, 2D, 2L

30%

3W, 5D, 2L

Goals Scored / Match
2.1

21 / 10 matches

1.8

18 / 10 matches

Goals Conceded / Match
1.1

11 / 10 matches

1.5

15 / 10 matches

Goal Difference
+10

+10

+3

+3

Clean Sheet
20%

2 / 10 matches

20%

2 / 10 matches

Over 2.5 Goals
60%

6 / 10 matches

60%

6 / 10 matches

Both Teams to Score
70%

7 / 10 matches

80%

8 / 10 matches

Top Scorer
O. Shaw (5 goals)
N. Clark (7 goals)
Most Goals by Half
1st Half: 9 / 2nd Half: 12
1st Half: 6 / 2nd Half: 12
Home Win Rate
80%

4W / 5 matches

20%

1W / 5 matches

Away Win Rate
40%

2W / 5 matches

40%

2W / 5 matches

Schedule Strength (SoS)
45.0

League Difficulty: 43.0, Opponent Quality: 46.3

46.4

League Difficulty: 45.0, Opponent Quality: 47.4

Elite Opponent Record
0%

0W / 0 matches

0%

0W / 0 matches

Expected Goals (xG)
1.79

Actual: 2.1 | Diff: +0.31

1.66

Actual: 1.8 | Diff: +0.14

Adjusted Power Rating
59.9

Attack: 66.5, Defense: 60.2, Form: 57.0

47.5

Attack: 57.8, Defense: 48.2, Form: 28.9

Goal Timing Analysis

2

0-15'

2
4

16-30'

2
3

31-45'

1
2

46-60'

1
5

61-75'

5
5

76-90+'

7
Hamilton
QOTS
Hamilton

Power Rating Breakdown

59.9

Overall

Attack 66.5
Defense 60.2
Form 57.0
Consistency 52.0
QOTS

Power Rating Breakdown

47.5

Overall

Attack 57.8
Defense 48.2
Form 28.9
Consistency 62.8

Strength of Schedule

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

League Difficulty

43.0 vs 45.0

Opponent Quality

46.3 vs 47.4

Elite Opponent Record

0% vs 0%
Hamilton logo Hamilton
W
Elgin (29%)
L
Kilmarnock (66%)
D
Raith Rovers (51%)
W
Peterhead (41%)
W
Clyde (44%)
D
Clyde (49%)
W
Forfar (44%)
W
Forfar (49%)
QOTS logo QOTS
L
Queen's Park (54%)
L
Aberdeen (60%)
W
Brora Rangers (42%)
D
Kelty Hearts (45%)
D
Stenhousemuir (64%)
D
Stenhousemuir (59%)
W
Alloa Athletic (39%)
D
Montrose (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
Elgin H
5 - 0 W
29%
Kilmarnock A
0 - 1 L
66%
Raith Rovers H
1 - 1 D
51%
Peterhead A
1 - 0 W
41%
Clyde H
4 - 3 W
44%
Clyde A
1 - 1 D
49%
Forfar H
2 - 1 W
44%
Forfar A
3 - 1 W
49%
Inverness A
1 - 2 L
58%
Peterhead H
3 - 1 W
32%
Opponent Breakdown
Opponent Breakdown
Score
Opp. Quality
Queen's Park A
1 - 3 L
54%
Aberdeen H
1 - 4 L
60%
Brora Rangers A
3 - 0 W
42%
Kelty Hearts H
1 - 1 D
45%
Stenhousemuir A
2 - 2 D
64%
Stenhousemuir H
1 - 1 D
59%
Alloa Athletic A
4 - 1 W
39%
Montrose H
2 - 2 D
38%
Peterhead A
1 - 1 D
37%
Cove Rangers H
2 - 0 W
36%

AI Analysis

A statistical edge is evident here, but the trailing side carries enough threat to keep this competitive. Once opponent quality is accounted for, the differential softens somewhat without fundamentally altering the overall outlook.

The level of competition each team has encountered is broadly aligned (SoS: 45.0 vs 46.4), which adds credibility to any direct statistical comparisons drawn between these two sides.

Offensively, Hamilton outperforms QOTS with 2.1 goals per match to 1.8, though the margin leaves the contest genuinely open.

Defensively, Hamilton holds the advantage — allowing just 1.1 goals per game against QOTS's 1.5.

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

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

Hamilton has an exceptional home record with a 80% win rate at their home ground. When playing at home, they become significantly more dangerous.

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 likely given current form.

📈 Form Momentum: Hamilton has been remarkably consistent, maintaining a steady 2.0 points per game over their last 10 matches. This stability makes them a predictable but reliable force.

📊 Key Trend: The form trajectories are diverging. Hamilton is on the rise with 6W in last 10, while QOTS shows signs of decline with 3W in last 10.

💡 Why This Matters: The 12.4-point power rating gap between these teams translates to approximately a 81% win probability for Hamilton. In practical terms, Hamilton would win 8 out of 10 such matchups.

While Hamilton holds a measurable edge in the adjusted standings, the 12.4-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

Hamilton

Hamilton

VS
QOTS

QOTS

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.

Hamilton

6W 2D 2L · 21 goals scored · 11 conceded

QOTS

3W 5D 2L · 18 goals scored · 15 conceded

Popular Teams

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

Login / Register

5 + 2 = ?
or