
bet365

BetMGM

William Hill

Betfred

BetUK

LiveScoreBet

10Bet

Virgin Bet
We all know the agonizing feeling: your team dominates possession, creates chance after golden chance, hits the woodwork twice, and then loses to a scruffy 90th-minute deflection from the opponent’s only shot on target. It’s the sheer agony of being a football fan.
But which Premier League fanbases actually have the statistical right to complain this season? Are you genuinely the victim of terrible luck, or is your team just lacking a clinical edge in front of goal? To settle the debate, the data analysis team at BettingTips4You.com has crunched the numbers on every single match of the 2025/26 season.
By analysing the Expected Goals (xG) generated and Expected Goals Against (xGA) conceded for all 20 clubs, we have simulated the Expected Points (xPTS) to reveal the ultimate “Heartbreak Table.” This alternative league standings exposes the raw truth behind the performances, stripping away the luck, the refereeing errors, and the bizarre deflections to show where every team should be sitting.
“xG tells the real story of a season. While the official league table relies on the final score, the Heartbreak Table exposes who has been genuinely robbed by bad variance, poor officiating, or elite opposition goalkeeping. Wolves fans have every right to feel aggrieved this year—their underlying metrics are top-half standard, yet they find themselves fighting near the bottom. Conversely, Aston Villa have pulled off a statistical miracle to sit where they are.”
— Tyler Morris, Football Data Journalist at BettingTips4You.com
The Data Breakdown: Heroes and Heartbreaks
Wolverhampton
Points lost to bad luck & variance. The unluckiest team in the league by a massive margin.
Aston Villa
Points gained over expected metrics. The luckiest team, pulling off a statistical miracle.
Crystal Palace
The second most unfortunate side, drastically underperforming their attacking output.
Wolverhampton Wanderers: Expected vs Actual Points
A staggering 17-point deficit highlighting severe underperformance against expected metrics.
Deep Dive: The Victims of Bad Luck
If you are a Wolverhampton Wanderers supporter, you might want to look away now. Our data proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that Wolves are the most unlucky team in the Premier League this season. Based on the quality of the chances they have created, and the lack of high-quality chances they have conceded, Wolves should have 44 points. Instead, they languish on just 27. This 17-point swing is the difference between a comfortable European charge and a stressful bottom-half scramble. Poor finishing and facing goalkeepers in the form of their lives have cost them dearly.
Joining Wolves on the podium of misfortune are Crystal Palace (-9 points) and Leeds United (-7 points). Both sides have consistently won the “xG battle” in their respective fixtures, playing dominant, front-foot football, only to be undone by fine margins. Leeds, for example, have the underlying metrics of a team sitting safely in the top half, but the reality of the league table tells a much more anxiety-inducing story.
Deep Dive: Riding the Wave of Fortune
On the completely opposite end of the spectrum, we have Aston Villa. Unai Emery’s side has completely defied the underlying data. According to xPTS, Villa have performed at the level of a team facing certain relegation, generating just 17 Expected Points across the campaign. Miraculously, they sit on 34 actual points. This incredible +17 point overperformance points to a combination of incredibly ruthless, low-probability finishing from their forwards and spectacular shot-stopping from their defense.
Sunderland (+10 points) and Everton (+6 points) are also riding their luck. The Black Cats have managed to grind out results in matches where they were statistically dominated, a testament to their resilience—or a warning sign that a drop-off in form could be imminent if their underlying performances do not improve.
The Title Race Truth
At the very top of the table, the data paints a fascinating picture of the title contenders. Arsenal currently sit on 57 points, and their xPTS is 56. This means Mikel Arteta’s side are exactly where they deserve to be; their league position is not built on luck, but on sustainable, dominant performances. Manchester City, however, are slightly overperforming. Sitting on 51 actual points versus 46 expected points, Pep Guardiola’s men are relying slightly on moments of individual brilliance to bail them out of tight fixtures.
The 2025/26 xG Heartbreak Table
*A negative difference (Red) means a team is unlucky (underperforming their xPTS). A positive difference (Green) means a team is lucky (overperforming their xPTS).
| Pos | Team | Actual PTS | Expected PTS | Heartbreak / Luck Factor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Arsenal | 57 | 56 | +1 |
| 2 | Manchester City | 51 | 46 | +5 |
| 3 | Chelsea | 46 | 47 | -1 |
| 4 | Liverpool | 44 | 46 | -2 |
| 5 | Manchester United | 44 | 43 | +1 |
| 6 | Newcastle United | 42 | 48 | -6 |
| 7 | Brentford | 41 | 42 | -1 |
| 8 | Crystal Palace | 41 | 50 | -9 |
| 9 | AFC Bournemouth | 39 | 40 | -1 |
| 10 | Brighton & Hove Albion | 38 | 42 | -4 |
| 11 | Leeds United | 38 | 45 | -7 |
| 12 | Aston Villa | 34 | 17 | +17 |
| 13 | Fulham | 31 | 28 | +3 |
| 14 | Everton | 31 | 25 | +6 |
| 15 | Nottingham Forest | 30 | 33 | -3 |
| 16 | West Ham United | 30 | 35 | -5 |
| 17 | Tottenham Hotspur | 30 | 31 | -1 |
| 18 | Wolverhampton Wanderers | 27 | 44 | -17 |
| 19 | Sunderland | 26 | 16 | +10 |
| 20 | Burnley | 19 | 27 | -8 |
Methodology & Data Usage
This study was independently compiled by the sports data team at BettingTips4You.com. To generate the Expected Points (xPTS) table, we reviewed the individual Expected Goals (xG) and Expected Goals Against (xGA) data for every Premier League match completed in the 2025/26 season to date. We then simulated match results by rounding the xG values to the nearest whole number to determine realistic wins, losses, and draws based solely on chance creation quality. We welcome journalists and media outlets to use this data, graphics, and expert commentary in their reporting. We kindly request that any usage includes a link back to this original research page for proper attribution.




