Analysis based on adjusted ELO ranking with Dixon-Coles, official FIFA EFI (Enhanced Football Intelligence) data, and real results from the 83 matches played so far — group stage + round of 16.
We are now in the knockout phase, and the data is beginning to tell a clearer story than the pre-World Cup predictions. Here are the numbers that truly matter: who dominates the real power ranking, who exceeds (or disappoints) model expectations, how each qualified team likes to play, and what official FIFA physical data reveals about tournament wear and tear.
1. The Real Power Ranking (ELO after Group Stage + Round of 16)
Forget the pre-tournament FIFA ranking. After 83 matches, the ELO system — recalculated match by match, with home bonus and multiplier based on goal difference — shows a well-defined power order at the top:
| # | Team | ELO |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 🇫🇷 France | 2065 |
| 2 | 🇪🇸 Spain | 2024 |
| 3 | 🏴 England | 2007 |
| 4 | 🇦🇷 Argentina | 2003 |
| 5 | 🇧🇷 Brazil | 1980 |
| 6 | 🇵🇹 Portugal | 1940 |
| 7 | 🇳🇱 Netherlands | 1924 |
| 8 | 🇩🇪 Germany | 1906 |
| 9 | 🇨🇴 Colombia | 1901 |
| 10 | 🇳🇴 Norway | 1898 |
France has clearly taken the lead — not just by winning, but by dominating their matches (see point 2). What stands out is Norway in the top 10: without a recent tradition of performance, but with one of the most productive attacks in the tournament (see below), driven by the Haaland-Ødegaard duo.
2. Who Dominates in Attack
The tournament's average goals per match is 2.94 — a high figure for a World Cup, driven by a handful of teams that systematically crush their opponents:
| Team | Goals Scored | Matches |
|---|---|---|
| 🇫🇷 France | 13 | 4 |
| 🇳🇱 Netherlands | 11 | 4 |
| 🇩🇪 Germany | 11 | 4 |
| 🇳🇴 Norway | 10 | 4 |
| 🇺🇸 United States | 10 | 4 |
| 🇸🇳 Senegal | 10 | 4 |
And on the other end, the most solid defense in the tournament (by xG conceded, not just goals conceded — a more reliable metric as it does not depend on goalkeeper performance):
| Team | xGA/match |
|---|---|
| 🇪🇸 Spain | 0.50 |
| 🇦🇷 Argentina | 0.54 |
| 🇨🇦 Canada | 0.67 |
| 🇲🇽 Mexico | 0.75 |
| 🇬🇭 Ghana | 0.79 |
| 🇧🇷 Brazil | 0.80 |
Interesting fact: Spain and Argentina appear as the toughest defenses to break down according to the model, without necessarily being known for it.
3. Who Surprises (for Better or Worse)
This is where the data gets really interesting. We calculated delta_pts — the difference between the points actually obtained by each team and the points the model (ELO + Dixon-Coles) expected given the level of opponents faced. This is not pure luck, but it is the most honest portrait of who "plays above their theoretical level" versus who is below.
Above Expectations:
| Team | delta_pts |
|---|---|
| 🇲🇽 Mexico | +2.67 |
| 🇫🇷 France | +2.67 |
| 🇳🇴 Norway | +2.17 |
| 🇵🇾 Paraguay | +1.95 |
| 🇬🇭 Ghana | +1.50 |
Mexico's case is doubly surprising: not only is the team accumulating more points than expected, but it also benefits from the home advantage (like the United States and Canada, co-hosts of this edition) — but this is already integrated into the model, so the +2.67 purely reflects performance.
Below Expectations (so far):
| Team | delta_pts |
|---|---|
| 🇺🇾 Uruguay | -2.93 |
| 🇸🇳 Senegal | -2.25 |
| 🇩🇪 Germany | -2.19 |
| 🇹🇳 Tunisia | -1.99 |
| 🇺🇿 Uzbekistan | -1.85 |
Germany's case is revealing: they have the 3rd highest number of goals scored in the tournament (11) but still disappoint on delta_pts — a sign that defense (involved in that fateful penalty shootout lost 4-3 against Paraguay, when the score was actually 1-1 after regular time) is costly. Teams that score a lot but also concede a lot tend to appear here, as the model weighs both aspects.
4. How Each Qualified Team Likes to Play
Thanks to official FIFA EFI (Enhanced Football Intelligence — more than 4,000 lines of data per player/match), we were able to map each team's goal creation style: where shots come from — pass-and-play combinations, crosses, set pieces, individual dribbles, etc.
The most frequent tactical labels among teams (all calculated by actual percentile within the tournament, no subjective opinion):
| Label | Number of Teams |
|---|---|
| Mid-block | 30 |
| Set-piece threat | 14 |
| Stingy defense | 13 |
| Direct style | 13 |
| Possession-based | 12 |
| Lots of dribbling | 12 |
| Lots of crosses | 12 |
| Fragile defense | 12 |
| Low block | 10 |
| High physical intensity | 9 |
| High press | 8 |
The tournament is clearly dominated by teams in a mid-block (30 out of 48 teams) — the most common posture is to remain organized without fully committing to either a high press or a very low block. Only 8 teams press truly aggressively throughout the match.
Concrete example: Spain creates 50% of its shots via pass-and-play combinations, and combines the labels "set-piece threat" and "stingy defense" — an almost complete profile. Egypt, on the other hand, is curiously the team with the lowest physical intensity in the entire tournament (last in sprints/match and defensive pressing applied) yet remains undefeated, carried by its efficiency and set pieces.
5. The Drama of Penalty Shootouts
Two round of 16 matches were decided by penalty shootouts — and it's worth highlighting a technical detail: public databases (including football-data.org itself) often mix the penalty shootout score with the actual match score. We corrected this in our modeling, as it directly affects ELO, goal difference, and all derived metrics:
- Germany 1-1 Paraguay (regular time) — Paraguay won on penalties 4-3. In the raw data, this incorrectly appeared as "4-5".
- Netherlands 1-1 Morocco (regular time) — Morocco won on penalties 3-2. This appeared as "3-4".
Without this correction, Germany would show 14 goals scored and 9 conceded in the statistics — in reality, it's 11 and 5. That changes everything.
6. What Lies Ahead
With 10 teams already qualified for the quarterfinals (Belgium, Brazil, Canada, United States, France, England, Morocco, Mexico, Norway, and Paraguay) and the rest of the round of 16 still underway, the next chapters of the tournament will test precisely the trends already indicated by the data:
-
France and Spain remain the clear favorites according to ELO, but the model also shows that no one is safe from instability — the
delta_ptsdifferences show that recent results do not always reflect the actual level of play. - Teams labeled "fragile defense" — 12 in total — are natural candidates for upsets against quality attacks.
- The drama of penalty shootouts has already appeared twice in the round of 16; statistically, it is reasonable to expect more such outcomes as the level of balance increases in the knockout rounds.
Methodology: ELO calculated sequentially (pre-match rating, not retroactive) with multiplier based on goal difference and home bonus for co-hosts (Mexico, United States, Canada). Probabilities via a bivariate Poisson model with Dixon-Coles adjustment (ρ = -0.18). Physical and chance creation data via FIFA EFI (source: Bustami/efi-fifa-data-wc-2026). Results data via football-data.org, with manual correction for matches decided by penalty shootouts.