Skip to content
Compare QOTS vs Hamilton

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

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

QOTS QOTS Home Team
Hamilton Hamilton Away Team
QOTS
47.5
L L W D D D W D D W

Last 10 Matches

Hamilton
59.9
W L D W W D W W L W

Performance Radar

QOTS
Hamilton

Categories Won

3

QOTS

5

Draw

7

Hamilton

Statistical Comparison

Win Percentage
30%

3W, 5D, 2L

60%

6W, 2D, 2L

Goals Scored / Match
1.8

18 / 10 matches

2.1

21 / 10 matches

Goals Conceded / Match
1.5

15 / 10 matches

1.1

11 / 10 matches

Goal Difference
+3

+3

+10

+10

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
80%

8 / 10 matches

70%

7 / 10 matches

Top Scorer
N. Clark (7 goals)
O. Shaw (5 goals)
Most Goals by Half
1st Half: 6 / 2nd Half: 12
1st Half: 9 / 2nd Half: 12
Home Win Rate
20%

1W / 5 matches

80%

4W / 5 matches

Away Win Rate
40%

2W / 5 matches

40%

2W / 5 matches

Schedule Strength (SoS)
46.4

League Difficulty: 45.0, Opponent Quality: 47.4

45.0

League Difficulty: 43.0, Opponent Quality: 46.3

Elite Opponent Record
0%

0W / 0 matches

0%

0W / 0 matches

Expected Goals (xG)
1.66

Actual: 1.8 | Diff: +0.14

1.79

Actual: 2.1 | Diff: +0.31

Adjusted Power Rating
47.5

Attack: 57.8, Defense: 48.2, Form: 28.9

59.9

Attack: 66.5, Defense: 60.2, Form: 57.0

Goal Timing Analysis

2

0-15'

2
2

16-30'

4
1

31-45'

3
1

46-60'

2
5

61-75'

5
7

76-90+'

5
QOTS
Hamilton
QOTS

Power Rating Breakdown

47.5

Overall

Attack 57.8
Defense 48.2
Form 28.9
Consistency 62.8
Hamilton

Power Rating Breakdown

59.9

Overall

Attack 66.5
Defense 60.2
Form 57.0
Consistency 52.0

Strength of Schedule

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

League Difficulty

45.0 vs 43.0

Opponent Quality

47.4 vs 46.3

Elite Opponent Record

0% vs 0%
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%)
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%)

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
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%
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%

AI Analysis

While the data leans decisively toward one side, dismissing the underdog would be premature. Adjusting for strength of schedule brings the margins closer together, yet the broader trend holds firm throughout the analysis.

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

Hamilton holds the attacking edge with 2.1 goals per match versus QOTS's 1.8, though the gap isn't insurmountable.

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

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

Hamilton 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.

Statistical modeling projects 3.2 goals in this fixture. The data points Over 2.5 as the value threshold, while BTTS stands at likely based on both sides' scoring records.

📈 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.

Hamilton has the edge based on adjusted metrics, but this is far from a foregone conclusion. The 12.4-point power gap suggests an advantage without guaranteeing victory.

Match Simulator

AI-powered match simulation based on real statistics

QOTS

QOTS

VS
Hamilton

Hamilton

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.

QOTS

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

Hamilton

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

Popular Teams

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

Login / Register

5 + 2 = ?
or