Quarter-final · Match 4

ArgentinavsSwitzerland

2026-07-11·20:00 local·Arrowhead Stadium · Kansas CityPredictions finalised

Snapshot · 2026-07-14Model 1.0.0Final prediction · locked 11 Jul, 23:29 UTCArgentina·Switzerland·
Full time · forecast gradedArgentina 3 1 SwitzerlandThe locked pre-match forecast has been graded against this result.See the calibration recap →

Match signals

Factors that favour each side, from statistical models to group stage form and match conditions. Longer bars = stronger advantage.

ArgentinaSignal balanceSwitzerland
87%13%

Argentina are dominant at 59% vs Switzerland's 14%. Quality, form, and model estimates all point the same way. An upset here would be a major story.

📊What the Models Say

5 Argentina
69%Elo Rating Model9%
StrongStrong

Rates teams by a single strength number updated after every match. Simpler but fast to react. It rates Argentina at 69% to win vs Switzerland at 9%.

55%Dixon-Coles Model17%
StrongStrong

Simulates the goal-scoring process using attack and defence strength. The heaviest-weighted model. It rates Argentina at 55% to win vs Switzerland at 17%.

53%Hierarchical Poisson20%
StrongStrong

Groups teams by confederation to share information. Helps for teams with fewer matches. It rates Argentina at 53% to win vs Switzerland at 20%.

59%Final Ensemble14%
StrongStrong

The published probability after calibration and adjustments. This is what the model says. It rates Argentina at 59% to win vs Switzerland at 14%.

3/3Model Agreement0/3
StrongStrong

All 3 models agree: Argentina is favoured. When models agree, the signal is stronger.

Tournament Form

3 Argentina
18pts (6W 0D 0L)Tournament Record11pts (3W 2D 1L)
StrongStrong

Argentina collected 18 points (6W 0D 0L) vs Switzerland's 11 (3W 2D 1L). A stronger tournament record.

2.83/matchGoals Scored1.67/match
ModerateModerate

Argentina averaged 2.83 goals per match vs Switzerland's 1.67. More firepower coming in.

1.0 conceded/matchDefence1.0 conceded/match
Even

Similar defensive records: Argentina 1.0, Switzerland 1.0 goals conceded per match.

+11Goal Difference+4
StrongStrong

Argentina's goal difference of +11 is better than Switzerland's +4. They outperformed opponents by more.

📈Momentum

1 Argentina1 Switzerland
+26.7Tournament Rating Change+14.4
SlightSlight

Argentina's rating rose +26.7 during the tournament while Switzerland's moved +14.4. The tournament has been kinder to Argentina.

+0.0017Player Form Trend+0.0101
ModerateModerate

Switzerland's players improved their form ratings during the tournament (+0.0101) vs Argentina (+0.0017). Players trending upward.

🏆Team Quality

3 Argentina1 Switzerland
2113Overall Strength (Elo)1889
StrongStrong

Argentina is rated 2113 vs Switzerland's 1889 (gap: 224). That's a very large gap in historical team strength.

1.47 xGExpected Chance Creation0.69 xG
ModerateModerate

The model expects Argentina to create 1.47 expected goals vs Switzerland's 0.69. More and better chances projected.

0.29Star Power0.52
ModerateModerate

Switzerland's top 3 starters are harder to replace (avg VORP 0.52) than Argentina's (0.29). More star power in key positions.

0.043Squad Familiarity0.012
ModerateModerate

Argentina's starters play together at club level more often (0.043 cohesion) than Switzerland's (0.012). More shared understanding on the pitch.

🌍Match Conditions

1 Argentina1 Switzerland
9,172kmTravel Distance7,781km
SlightSlight

Switzerland traveled 7,781km vs Argentina's 9,172km. A shorter journey means less fatigue.

2h shiftTimezone Shift7h shift
ModerateModerate

Argentina face a 2h timezone shift vs Switzerland's 7h. Less jet lag disruption.

17 signals across 5 categories. Signal strength reflects how large the gap is between the two teams on each factor. Signals are descriptive, not prescriptive.

The forecast

Match-outcome probability

  • Argentina win
    59.4%
  • Draw
    26.6%
  • Switzerland win
    14.0%

A 224-point Elo gap frames this as a significant mismatch, yet the model still gives Switzerland a 14% probability of a result — enough to make this more than a formality.

Likeliest score1–016.2%
First goal0-15'30.3%
Both teams score39.3%
Over 2.5 goals36.8%
Top scorerMessi11.2%
Expected goals1.5 - 0.7
Loading pitch visualisation...

Goals & scorelines

Likeliest score 1–0 (16.2%) · xG 1.5 - 0.7

Expected goals

Argentina
1.47
Switzerland
0.69

Mean of the Dixon-Coles joint goal distribution. Same fit that produces the most-likely-scoreline list below.

Most likely scorelines

  • 1–0
    16.2%
  • 1–1
    12.4%
  • 2–0
    12.4%
  • 0–0
    12.2%
  • 2–1
    8.6%

From the Dixon-Coles joint Poisson with the low-score correction. Scorelines are listed in probability order; this is a description of the model's distribution, not a recommendation.

Most likely half-time scorelines

  • 0–0
    34.4%
  • 1–0
    24.4%
  • 0–1
    11.2%
  • 1–1
    9.2%
  • 2–0
    9.2%

Same Dixon-Coles fit as the full-time list above, with rates halved to a 45-minute window and the low-score correction applied to that 1st-half block. The 0-0 row sits higher here than at full-time because fewer minutes have elapsed.

Goal totals

  • More than 0.5 goals
    87.8%
  • More than 1.5 goals
    64.4%
  • More than 2.5 goals
    36.8%
  • More than 3.5 goals
    17.4%
  • More than 4.5 goals
    6.9%
  • More than 5.5 goals
    2.3%
  • Both teams score
    39.3%

Each row is the probability the match finishes with more than the listed number of goals. Both-teams-to-score is the probability each side scores at least once. All values are marginals of the Dixon-Coles joint goal grid that produces the scoreline list above — not market lines or any other operator construct.

Event-typed probabilities

  • Argentina clean sheetOpposing team scores zero50.0%
  • Switzerland clean sheetOpposing team scores zero23.0%

Derived from the same Dixon-Coles joint distribution as the scoreline list. These are descriptive event probabilities — see CLAUDE.md §3/§4 (formerly COMPLIANCE.md §4.2.7) for the framing the project uses.

Win-margin probability

  • Argentina by 4+
    3.7%
  • Argentina by 3+
    11.5%
  • Argentina by 2+
    28.7%
  • Argentina by 1+
    55.1%
  • Draw
    28.0%
  • Switzerland by 1+
    16.9%
  • Switzerland by 2+
    4.8%
  • Switzerland by 3+
    1.0%
  • Switzerland by 4+
    0.2%

Each row is the probability the match ends with the listed margin or larger in that direction. Marginal of the Dixon-Coles joint goal grid; the “by 1+” rows plus the draw row sum to 1.

How the match unfolds

Over 2.5 goals 36.8% · BTTS 39.3%

Game state through the match

0%25%50%75%100%0'15'30'45'60'75'90'
  • Argentina ahead55.8%
  • Level26.6%
  • Switzerland ahead17.6%

Probability of each game state at minutes 0, 15, 30, 45, 60, 75, 90 — derived from two independent thinned-Poisson processes with the Dixon-Coles per-team rates. The three lines always sum to 1 at each minute. The right column shows the state at the match's closing minute.

When the first goal arrives

  • 0–15
    30.3%
  • 15–30
    21.1%
  • 30–45
    14.7%
  • 45–60
    10.3%
  • 60–75
    7.1%
  • 75–90
    5.0%
  • No goal
    11.5%

Probability the match's first goal arrives in each 15-minute window. Homogeneous Poisson with combined rate λ = λh + λa from the Dixon-Coles fit; the seven rows (six windows + no-goal tail) sum to 1.

Half-time / full-time grid

Joint probability of half-time and full-time results
HT ↓ / FT →HArgentina winDDrawASwitzerland win
HArgentina ahead35.9%3.9%0.7%
DLevel18.1%19.0%7.0%
ASwitzerland ahead1.7%3.8%9.7%

Each cell is P(half-time result, full-time result). All nine cells sum to 1. Derived from a halved-λ Dixon-Coles fit for the first half plus an independent-Poisson second-half convolution.

Comeback probability

  • Argentina trail at HT, avoid defeat at FT
    5.5%
  • Switzerland trail at HT, avoid defeat at FT
    4.6%

Joint probability — P(side trailing at half-time AND avoiding defeat at full-time). NOT conditional on trailing at HT. Derived from the same half-time / full-time decomposition that produces the HT/FT grid above; a tied first half is neither a home nor an away comeback opportunity.

PK shootout simulator

If the match ends level after extra time, the model estimates the shootout outcome from each team's Bayesian-smoothed conversion / save rate (Model #15). The bracket simulator uses the symmetric (averaged) ordering; the two what-if scenarios below show how the win probabilities shift when conditioning on which team kicks first.

Symmetric (averaged over both orderings — used by the bracket simulator)
  • Argentina
    68.4%
  • Switzerland
    31.6%
If Argentina kicks first
  • Argentina
    80.0%
  • Switzerland
    20.0%
If Switzerland kicks first
  • Argentina
    57.2%
  • Switzerland
    42.8%
Expected paired rounds
4.8
Decided in regulation 5 kicks
75.0%

First-kicker advantage

The first kicker's per-kick conversion rate is scaled by ×1.050 (about +5.0%), stacked on the Markov chain's structural asymmetry. Real World Cup shootouts use a coin toss for kicker order, so on average the order is 50/50 — the symmetric path above is the relevant number for a single fixture. The ordering-conditioned probabilities are a descriptive what-if scenario.

Literature: first kickers win ≈ 60% historically (Apesteguia & Palacios-Huerta, American Economic Review 2010; Vandebroek et al. 2016).

Per-team posteriors: Argentina conv 77.0%, save 27.9%Switzerland conv 71.4%, save 20.0%. Smoothed against the global prior with prior strength 20 — see /docs/methodology/.

Teams & players

Top scorer: Messi (11.2%)

Match detail

Argentina

Model-rated key players: Lionel Messi (FW) — P(scores) 11.2%; Lautaro Martínez (FW) — P(scores) 6.7%; Nicolás González (FW) — P(scores) 5.2%.

How they play

Argentina under Lionel Scaloni play a possession dominant game, holding 59% of the ball — among the highest in the tournament field. Their likely shape is a 4-3-3, though they have also used 3-5-2 and 4-4-2. They apply moderate pressing intensity (PPDA 19.1) and build patiently through midfield with 7.8 passes per attacking sequence. They favour high-quality chances (xG/shot 0.163, among the best in the field).

What they must execute

To succeed, Argentina must control tempo and territory in midfield — their possession-dominant approach depends on dictating the rhythm of each match. Managing minutes for Lionel Messi across what could be seven matches will test the coaching staff's rotation planning.

Storylines
Touchline: Lionel ScaloniDefending champion — Winner 2022.
Last dance: Lionel Messi38 at kickoff with 198 caps — probably his final World Cup.
Defensive form: Conceded only 0.36 xG per match across 6 recent internationals — #1 of 35 in the field for defensive solidity.

Switzerland

Model-rated key players: Ricardo Rodriguez (DF) — P(scores) 7.0%; Breel Embolo (FW) — P(scores) 2.0%; Zeki Amdouni (FW) — P(scores) 1.1%.

How they play

Switzerland under Murat Yakin play a pragmatic game with 50% possession. Their likely shape is a 4-2-3-1, though they have also used 4-3-3. They apply moderate pressing intensity (PPDA 22.8).

What they must execute

Switzerland play a pragmatic, results-oriented game that adapts shape to the opposition. Tactical flexibility is their strength. The risk is inconsistency — without a default identity, a poor result can cascade if the team struggles to find a Plan B. Managing minutes for Remo Freuler across what could be seven matches will test the coaching staff's rotation planning.

Storylines
Form trend: Gained 79 international Elo points over the last 12 months — current rating 1950.
Top scorer: Breel EmboloModel's top anytime-scorer for the team — 27% probability of scoring at least once, rank #11 of all players.
Top-league core: 18 of 25 predicted-squad players played in a top-5 European league last season — top-tier league pedigree across the squad.
Workload going in

Argentina's predicted XI averages 1,997 club minutes over the 2024-25 season (moderate load). Switzerland's predicted XI averages 1,993 club minutes over the 2024-25 season (moderate load).

Argentina coverage: 85.0% (11/11 XI matched against the FBref Big-5) · Switzerland: 76.0% (11/11).

Set-piece outlook

Argentina historically converts 17.1% of xG from set-pieces, contributing 0.25 expected set-piece goals in this fixture. Switzerland converts 10.3% from set-pieces (0.07 expected). Combined, the model expects 0.32 set-piece goals across the 90 minutes.

  • P(Argentina scores set-piece goal) 22.2%
  • P(Switzerland scores set-piece goal) 7.0%
  • P(set-piece goal in match) 27.6%

Argentina: Lionel Messi on corners (32 corners), Guido Rodríguez on free kicks (per fbref 2022 23) · Switzerland: Granit Xhaka on free kicks (per fbref 2022 23)

Penalty outlook

If a penalty is awarded to Argentina, the model gives 77.0% conversion, 71.4% for Switzerland. If this match goes to a shootout, the symmetric (coin-toss averaged) win probability is 68.4% Argentina / 31.6% Switzerland.

Argentina primary PK: Lionel Messi (3/5 in 2020-21, per fbref 2022 23) · Switzerland primary PK: Ricardo Rodriguez (1/2 in 2017-18, per fbref 2022 23).

Derived from the model's per-fixture forecast joint and supporting reference data (predicted squads, set-piece xG share, PK posteriors, club minutes). See /docs/methodology/ for the full methodology.

Squad depth

Most irreplaceable starters

Argentina

  1. Giovani Lo CelsoAttacking midfieldNo natural backup0.30gap
  2. Lautaro MartínezStrikerCover: José Manuel López · 0.670.30gap
  3. Leandro ParedesDefensive midfieldNo natural backup0.26gap

Switzerland

  1. Dan NdoyeWingerCover: Noah Okafor · 0.000.53gap
  2. Manuel AkanjiCentre-backCover: Aurèle Amenda · 0.360.53gap
  3. Nico ElvediCentre-backCover: Aurèle Amenda · 0.360.51gap

Gap = how far a side's rating at the position falls from the starter to his likely in-squad replacement (named under each name). Larger = harder to replace. Descriptive metric, does not feed the published probabilities. Methodology →

Match conditions

  • AltitudeNear sea level229 m
  • Avg temperatureFive-year mean over the tournament window25.8 °C
  • Avg humidity69%
  • Heat stressShade WBGT ~27.5 °CLow heat stress
  • Pitch surfacenatural grass

Natural-grass NFL stadium; FIFA-standard hybrid pitch for the tournament.

Heat stress is a shade Wet-Bulb Globe Temperature proxy from the venue's climatology mean temperature and humidity; FIFA mandates cooling breaks at WBGT 32 °C. Evening kickoff (local time). These are long-window averages, not a match-day forecast, and they are not inputs to the forecast.

Top scorers · P(scores in this match)

Switzerland

Per-player scoring rate from Model #5 (`p_score_per_match`). Reflects each player's npxG/90, expected minutes, team xG share, and the average opposing-team defence. See /docs/methodology/.

Recent match form

Last match player ratings

Argentina

vs Cape Verde · avg 6.6

8
Lisandro MartínezCB
ATK
DEF
PAS
8
Cristian RomeroCB
ATK
DEF
PAS
7
Emiliano MartínezGK
ATK
DEF
PAS
7
Nahuel MolinaRB
ATK
DEF
PAS
6
Lautaro MartínezST
ATK
DEF
PAS
6
Leandro ParedesCM
ATK
DEF
PAS
6
Alexis Mac AllisterCM
ATK
DEF
PAS
5
Gonzalo MontielRB
ATK
DEF
PAS

Switzerland

vs Algeria · avg 7.6

8
Johan ManzambiST
ATK
DEF
PAS
8
Breel EmboloST
ATK
DEF
PAS
8
Ricardo RodriguezLB
ATK
DEF
PAS
8
Swiss GoalkeeperGK
ATK
DEF
PAS
6
Denis ZakariaDM
ATK
DEF
PAS

Player scores from official highlight analysis of each team's most recent match. Observational, not a model input. Methodology →

Under the hood

Model-by-model comparison

Argentina vs Switzerland

High disagreement (15.9%)
ModelWeightHomeDrawAway
EloRating-based strength estimate32%
68.5%
22.0%
9.4%
Dixon-ColesGoal-process model with low-score correction63%
55.2%
27.8%
17.1%
Hierarchical PoissonBayesian model with confederation pooling6%
52.7%
27.3%
20.0%
Bayesian stackingLearned-weight combination
66.0%
27.2%
6.9%
Ensemble (published)Uniform average + isotonic calibration
59.5%
26.6%
14.0%
Home spread: 15.9%
Draw spread: 5.8%
Away spread: 10.6%
How each model works
Elo
Each team carries a single strength rating updated after every match by a margin-aware K-factor. Match probabilities come from the logistic function of the rating gap. Elo is fast-adapting but coarse — it sees only who won and by how much, not how the goals were scored.
Dixon-Coles
A Poisson regression on team-level attack and defence parameters, fitted via maximum likelihood with an exponential time-decay weighting. The Dixon-Coles correction adjusts the four low-score cells (0-0, 1-0, 0-1, 1-1) where independent Poisson underestimates dependence. Produces full scoreline distributions, not just H/D/A.
Hierarchical Poisson
A Bayesian Poisson model fitted via MCMC (PyMC) with hierarchical priors that pool attack and defence parameters within confederations. Shrinks small-sample teams toward their confederation mean — helpful for nations with few recent competitive fixtures. Slower to fit but better-calibrated on the tails.
Bayesian stacking
Optimises simplex weights (w_elo, w_dc, w_hp) to maximise the leave-one-out log-score across a walk-forward backtest (Yao et al. 2018). The result is a weighted average of the three component models' probabilities, then isotonic-calibrated. Adds no extra features — just learns which component to trust more from historical accuracy.
Ensemble (published)
Equal-weight average of all three component models, followed by per-class isotonic regression calibration fitted on 24 months of walk-forward out-of-fold predictions. This is the probability published on the site. The uniform mean is deliberately simple — it avoids overfitting to the stacking weights' training window.

Three independent component models feed two combination strategies. The uniform ensemble is the published probability; Bayesian stacking uses learned weights. Amber bars flag >5pp divergence from the published number. Full methodology

Latest news & match context

Match conditions
Stage:
Quarter-final · Match 4
Date:
11 Jul
Venue:
Arrowhead Stadium, Kansas City
Beyond the model

Ranked by likely importance. None of these feed the forecast: the probabilities rest on team strength, venue conditions and the style matchup.

  1. 1.Elimination stakes: A one-off elimination tie. Motivation, risk appetite and game management under tournament pressure are not model inputs; the forecast rests on team strength and the style matchup.
Availability

Argentina

Argentina come in at close to full strength.

Switzerland

Switzerland come in at close to full strength.

What it means

Argentina and Switzerland both come in at close to full strength, so the forecast rests on baseline team strength rather than late team-news swings.

Availability from the predicted squads and injury feed; forecast adjustments from the model's own decomposition. See /docs/methodology/.

Standard Pass

This match is a free preview

You're seeing the model's full forecast for this fixture for free. Unlock the same depth: probabilities, expected goals, scoreline distributions, and per-player scoring, for all 104 matches with a Standard Pass, valid through the tournament.

Get the Pass, $15

Every forecast graded against the real result, scored on 987 matches since 2014. See the scorecard.

24h money-back, no questions asked·No subscription, no auto-renewal·Access through 31 Dec 2026. See refund policy.