Round of 32 · Match 11
PortugalvsCroatia
2026-07-02·19:00 local·BMO Field · TorontoPredictions finalised
Match signals
Factors that favour each side, from statistical models to group stage form and match conditions. Longer bars = stronger advantage.
Portugal are strong favourites at 58% vs Croatia's 18%. Most signals point the same way. Croatia will need to outperform their rating.
📊What the Models Say
Rates teams by a single strength number updated after every match. Simpler but fast to react. It rates Portugal at 50% to win vs Croatia at 28%.
Simulates the goal-scoring process using attack and defence strength. The heaviest-weighted model. It rates Portugal at 52% to win vs Croatia at 21%.
Groups teams by confederation to share information. Helps for teams with fewer matches. It rates Portugal at 52% to win vs Croatia at 22%.
The published probability after calibration and adjustments. This is what the model says. It rates Portugal at 58% to win vs Croatia at 18%.
All 3 models agree: Portugal is favoured. When models agree, the signal is stronger.
⚽Tournament Form
Portugal collected 8 points (2W 2D 1L) vs Croatia's 6 (2W 0D 2L). A stronger tournament record.
Similar attacking output: Portugal 1.6 goals/match, Croatia 1.5.
Portugal conceded just 0.6 goals/match vs Croatia's 1.75. Tighter at the back.
Portugal's goal difference of +5 is better than Croatia's -1. They outperformed opponents by more.
📈Momentum
Portugal's rating rose +1.0 during the tournament while Croatia's moved -19.3. The tournament has been kinder to Portugal.
Croatia's players improved their form ratings during the tournament (+0.0001) vs Portugal (-0.0019). Players trending upward.
🏆Team Quality
Portugal is rated 1984 vs Croatia's 1930 (gap: 54). That's a noticeable gap in historical team strength.
The model expects Portugal to create 1.53 expected goals vs Croatia's 0.86. More and better chances projected.
Portugal's top 3 starters are harder to replace (avg VORP 0.43) than Croatia's (0.28). More star power in key positions.
Portugal's starters play together at club level more often (0.050 cohesion) than Croatia's (0.030). More shared understanding on the pitch.
🌍Match Conditions
Portugal traveled 5,761km vs Croatia's 7,051km. A shorter journey means less fatigue.
Portugal face a 5h timezone shift vs Croatia's 6h. 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.
比赛预测
Match-outcome probability
- Portugal win49.1%
- Draw27.2%
- Croatia win23.6%
A clash of identities: Portugal's possession-dominant approach meets Croatia's structured-press style in a fixture the model gives to Portugal at 58%.
▸进球与比分
Likeliest score 1–0 (13.2%) · xG 1.5 - 0.9
Expected goals
Mean of the Dixon-Coles joint goal distribution. Same fit that produces the most-likely-scoreline list below.
Most likely scorelines
- 1–013.2%
- 1–112.8%
- 2–010.7%
- 0–09.8%
- 2–19.2%
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
- 0–030.8%
- 1–022.5%
- 0–112.4%
- 1–110.6%
- 2–08.9%
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 goals90.2%
- More than 1.5 goals69.8%
- More than 2.5 goals43.0%
- More than 3.5 goals22.1%
- More than 4.5 goals9.6%
- More than 5.5 goals3.6%
- Both teams score46.1%
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
- Portugal clean sheetOpposing team scores zero42.2%
- Croatia clean sheetOpposing team scores zero21.5%
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
- Portugal by 4+3.8%
- Portugal by 3+11.3%
- Portugal by 2+27.6%
- Portugal by 1+52.4%
- Draw27.2%
- Croatia by 1+20.4%
- Croatia by 2+6.8%
- Croatia by 3+1.7%
- Croatia by 4+0.3%
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.
▸比赛如何展开
Over 2.5 goals 43.0% · BTTS 46.1%
Game state through the match
- Portugal ahead53.1%
- Level25.8%
- Croatia ahead21.1%
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
- 0–1533.0%
- 15–3022.1%
- 30–4514.8%
- 45–609.9%
- 60–756.7%
- 75–904.5%
- No goal9.1%
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
| HT ↓ / FT → | HPortugal win | DDraw | ACroatia win |
|---|---|---|---|
| HPortugal ahead | 34.1% | 4.4% | 1.0% |
| DLevel | 16.9% | 17.3% | 8.0% |
| ACroatia ahead | 2.0% | 4.3% | 12.0% |
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
- Portugal trail at HT, avoid defeat at FT6.3%
- Croatia trail at HT, avoid defeat at FT5.4%
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.
- Portugal46.4%
- Croatia53.6%
- Portugal57.0%
- Croatia43.0%
- Portugal35.7%
- Croatia64.3%
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: Portugal conv 73.3%, save 28.9%; Croatia conv 75.0%, save 30.0%. Smoothed against the global prior with prior strength 20 — see /docs/methodology/.
▸球队与球员
Top scorer: Ronaldo (10.5%)
Match detail
Portugal
Model-rated key players: Cristiano Ronaldo (FW) — P(scores) 10.5%; Gonçalo Ramos (FW) — P(scores) 3.7%; João Félix (FW) — P(scores) 3.4%.
Portugal under Roberto Martínez 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. They apply moderate pressing intensity (PPDA 21.6) and build patiently through midfield with 7.9 passes per attacking sequence. They generate a high volume of shots (13.5 per 90).
To succeed, Portugal must control tempo and territory in midfield — their possession-dominant approach depends on dictating the rhythm of each match. Managing minutes for Cristiano Ronaldo across what could be seven matches will test the coaching staff's rotation planning.
Croatia
Model-rated key players: Ante Budimir (FW) — P(scores) 9.0%; Andrej Kramarić (FW) — P(scores) 3.9%; Igor Matanović (FW) — P(scores) 2.7%.
Croatia under Zlatko Dalić play a structured press game, holding 54% of the ball — among the highest in the tournament field. Their likely shape is a 4-3-3, though they have also used 4-2-3-1. They apply moderate pressing intensity (PPDA 20.4) and build patiently through midfield with 7.1 passes per attacking sequence. They favour high-quality chances (xG/shot 0.142, among the best in the field).
Croatia need their high press to force turnovers in dangerous areas — if opponents can play through the press, the space left behind is vulnerable. Physical conditioning and squad rotation will be critical to sustain pressing intensity across a long tournament. Managing minutes for Ivan Perišić across what could be seven matches will test the coaching staff's rotation planning.
Portugal's predicted XI averages 2,098 club minutes over the 2024-25 season (moderate load). Croatia's predicted XI averages 2,049 club minutes over the 2024-25 season (moderate load).
Portugal coverage: 78.0% (9/11 XI matched against the FBref Big-5) · Croatia: 68.0% (9/11).
Portugal historically converts 17.0% of xG from set-pieces, contributing 0.26 expected set-piece goals in this fixture. Croatia converts 14.2% from set-pieces (0.12 expected). Combined, the model expects 0.38 set-piece goals across the 90 minutes.
- P(Portugal scores set-piece goal) 23.0%
- P(Croatia scores set-piece goal) 11.6%
- P(set-piece goal in match) 31.9%
Portugal: Pedro Neto on corners (20 corners), Rúben Neves on free kicks (per fbref 2022 23) · Croatia: Luka Modrić on corners (15 corners), Kristijan Jakić on free kicks (per fbref 2022 23)
If a penalty is awarded to Portugal, the model gives 73.3% conversion, 75.0% for Croatia. If this match goes to a shootout, the symmetric (coin-toss averaged) win probability is 46.4% Portugal / 53.6% Croatia.
Portugal primary PK: Cristiano Ronaldo (3/3 in 2021-22, per fbref 2022 23) · Croatia primary PK: Ante Budimir (2/2 in 2021-22, 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
Portugal
- Bruno FernandesAttacking midfieldCover: Francisco Trincão · 0.400.56gap
- Diogo CostaGoalkeeperCover: Rui Silva · 0.500.50gap
- Bernardo SilvaAttacking midfieldCover: Francisco Trincão · 0.400.24gap
Croatia
- Dominik LivakovićGoalkeeperCover: Ivor Pandur · 0.510.40gap
- Joško GvardiolCentre-backCover: Martin Erlić · 0.690.30gap
- Marin PongračićCentre-backCover: Martin Erlić · 0.690.16gap
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 level78 m
- Avg temperatureFive-year mean over the tournament window21.2 °C
- Avg humidity71%
- Heat stressShade WBGT ~22.9 °CLow heat stress
- Pitch surfacenatural grass
Natural-grass football stadium.
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)
- Cristiano RonaldoPKFW10.5%
- Gonçalo RamosFW3.7%
- João FélixFW3.4%
- Ante BudimirPKFW9.0%
- Andrej KramarićFW3.9%
- Igor MatanovićFW2.7%
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
Portugal
vs Colombia · avg 7.7
Croatia
vs Ghana · avg 6.9
Player scores from official highlight analysis of each team's most recent match. Observational, not a model input. Methodology →
Video analysis: player performance
Per-player ratings and event breakdowns from official highlights analysis. Tap a player to see their full match timeline.
9Ronaldo38'–54'Converted a crucial penalty to equalize for Portugal and was a constant offensive threat, demonstrating leadership.
2goals▼
Converted a crucial penalty to equalize for Portugal and was a constant offensive threat, demonstrating leadership.
Match timeline
8PerisicOpened the scoring for Croatia with a well-placed shot, demonstrating clinical finishing.
Opened the scoring for Croatia with a well-placed shot, demonstrating clinical finishing.
7Vlašić28'–28'Showed good attacking instincts by scoring, though it was disallowed for offside.
1goals▼
Showed good attacking instincts by scoring, though it was disallowed for offside.
Match timeline
7Sučić119'–119'Displayed good attacking awareness and finishing by scoring, even if the goal was negated by an offside call.
1goals▼
Displayed good attacking awareness and finishing by scoring, even if the goal was negated by an offside call.
Match timeline
6ModrićMentioned for sportsmanship at the end of the match, but no specific in-game contributions were highlighted.
▼
Mentioned for sportsmanship at the end of the match, but no specific in-game contributions were highlighted.
Match timeline
Match observations
- The match was a high-scoring affair, with both teams demonstrating significant attacking intent.
- Multiple goals were disallowed for offside, adding to the drama and frustration for both sides.
- The game featured several momentum swings, with each team having periods of dominance.
▸模型细节
Model-by-model comparison
Portugal vs Croatia
| Model | Weight | Home | Draw | Away |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EloRating-based strength estimate | 32% | 49.6% | 22.0% | 28.4% |
| Dixon-ColesGoal-process model with low-score correction | 63% | 52.3% | 27.1% | 20.5% |
| Hierarchical PoissonBayesian model with confederation pooling | 6% | 51.7% | 26.1% | 22.2% |
| Bayesian stackingLearned-weight combination | — | 54.9% | 26.0% | 19.2% |
| Ensemble (published)Uniform average + isotonic calibration | — | 57.6% | 24.7% | 17.7% |
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
No recent headlines for Portugal or Croatia.
- Stage:
- Round of 32 · Match 11
- Date:
- 2 Jul
- Venue:
- BMO Field, Toronto
Ranked by likely importance. None of these feed the forecast: the probabilities rest on team strength, venue conditions and the style matchup.
- 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.
Portugal
Portugal come in at close to full strength.
Croatia
Croatia come in at close to full strength.
Portugal and Croatia 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
本场比赛为免费预览
您正在免费查看模型对本场比赛的完整预测。解锁同等深度的分析: 概率、预期进球数、比分分布和球员进球预测, 覆盖全部 104 场比赛, 只需购买一次 Standard Pass, 有效期至赛事结束。
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.