Inter's recorded results for 2025/2026, newest first, with the available xG behind each score. Compare outcomes with the chances created and conceded, then open a match for more detail.
Results
- Wins – draws – losses (W–D–L)
- 2 wins, 3 draws, 0 losses
9 pts 13–9 goals +4 GD
Chances
- Provider xG / xGA
- 6.81 – 9.89
- 1.36 – 1.98 per match
- xGD
- -3.08
- -0.62 per match
- xG record
- 2 with the chances, 0 with even chances, 3 against them
Comparable xG: 5 of 5 completed results.
Points vs xPts Model
9 pts 5.4 xPts
+3.6 vs xPts
Matched xPts: 5 of 5 selected results.
Model · How xPts works →Match points use 3 for a win, 1 for a draw and 0 for a loss, before deductions or sanctions.
Points vs xPts uses only matches with available xPts on both sides of the comparison.
What the results say
Last 5 · All competitions · Away
Inter's mixed record runs ahead of the chances they created and conceded. They out-created the opponent in 2 of 5 matches, for −3.08 xG difference overall on 6.81–9.89. Their points total of 9 sits 3.6 above the model's 5.4 xPts, so the results have clearly outrun the chances. The win against Como came with −2.24 xGD.
Points minus xPts, match by match
Over these 5 results Inter are 3.65 points above their xPts. The gap was widest at +4.31, against Lazio on Sat 09/05.
- Points
- 9
- xPts
- 5.35
- Gap
- +3.65
- This match
- Match gap
- Running gap
| Date | Opponent | Points | xPts | Match gap | Running gap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sun 22/03 | Fiorentina | 1 | 0.73 | +0.27 | +0.27 |
| Sun 12/04 | Como | 3 | 0.24 | +2.76 | +3.03 |
| Sun 26/04 | Torino | 1 | 0.83 | +0.17 | +3.20 |
| Sat 09/05 | Lazio | 3 | 1.89 | +1.11 | +4.31 |
| Sat 23/05 | Bologna | 1 | 1.66 | -0.66 | +3.65 |
Scores and xG
Inter first
-
Match analysis →
Why this label · Bologna, Sat 23/05
The match was drawn although the team recorded a positive xG difference. The outcome was weaker than that chance advantage suggests.
An xGD of at least +0.25 is positive; at most −0.25 is negative; between them is approximately even. The band uses unrounded figures and is an editorial guide, not a statistical confidence threshold. The chip on each result reads one of three ways: backed by the chances, with even chances, or against them. Counted over the selection, those three are the xG record on the Chances card — 5–1–0 reads as five results with the chances, one even and none against them.
- Points
- 1
- Post-match model xPts
- 1.66
- Points minus xPts
- -0.66
xPts is our post-match model's 3 × win probability + draw probability using the match's provider xG, not a pre-match forecast.
Learn how xG and xPts are calculated → -
Match analysis →
Why this label · Lazio, Sat 09/05
The team won and had a positive xG difference. The chances support the direction of the result, without making a judgment about fairness.
An xGD of at least +0.25 is positive; at most −0.25 is negative; between them is approximately even. The band uses unrounded figures and is an editorial guide, not a statistical confidence threshold. The chip on each result reads one of three ways: backed by the chances, with even chances, or against them. Counted over the selection, those three are the xG record on the Chances card — 5–1–0 reads as five results with the chances, one even and none against them.
- Points
- 3
- Post-match model xPts
- 1.89
- Points minus xPts
- +1.11
xPts is our post-match model's 3 × win probability + draw probability using the match's provider xG, not a pre-match forecast.
Learn how xG and xPts are calculated → -
Match analysis →
Why this label · Torino, Sun 26/04
The match was drawn although the team recorded less xG. The outcome was stronger than that chance difference suggests.
An xGD of at least +0.25 is positive; at most −0.25 is negative; between them is approximately even. The band uses unrounded figures and is an editorial guide, not a statistical confidence threshold. The chip on each result reads one of three ways: backed by the chances, with even chances, or against them. Counted over the selection, those three are the xG record on the Chances card — 5–1–0 reads as five results with the chances, one even and none against them.
- Points
- 1
- Post-match model xPts
- 0.83
- Points minus xPts
- +0.17
xPts is our post-match model's 3 × win probability + draw probability using the match's provider xG, not a pre-match forecast.
Learn how xG and xPts are calculated → -
Match analysis →
Why this label · Como, Sun 12/04
The team won despite recording less xG than its opponent. That contrast does not make the win impossible or establish why it happened.
An xGD of at least +0.25 is positive; at most −0.25 is negative; between them is approximately even. The band uses unrounded figures and is an editorial guide, not a statistical confidence threshold. The chip on each result reads one of three ways: backed by the chances, with even chances, or against them. Counted over the selection, those three are the xG record on the Chances card — 5–1–0 reads as five results with the chances, one even and none against them.
- Points
- 3
- Post-match model xPts
- 0.23
- Points minus xPts
- +2.77
xPts is our post-match model's 3 × win probability + draw probability using the match's provider xG, not a pre-match forecast.
Learn how xG and xPts are calculated → -
Match analysis →
Why this label · Fiorentina, Sun 22/03
The match was drawn although the team recorded less xG. The outcome was stronger than that chance difference suggests.
An xGD of at least +0.25 is positive; at most −0.25 is negative; between them is approximately even. The band uses unrounded figures and is an editorial guide, not a statistical confidence threshold. The chip on each result reads one of three ways: backed by the chances, with even chances, or against them. Counted over the selection, those three are the xG record on the Chances card — 5–1–0 reads as five results with the chances, one even and none against them.
- Points
- 1
- Post-match model xPts
- 0.73
- Points minus xPts
- +0.27
xPts is our post-match model's 3 × win probability + draw probability using the match's provider xG, not a pre-match forecast.
Learn how xG and xPts are calculated →
Biggest overperformance
Como 4:3
· Away xG / xGA 0.88 – 3.12
- Goal difference
- +1
- xGD
- -2.24
- GD minus xGD
- +3.24
Among 5 comparable results.
Open match →
Reading these results
xG is the provider's estimate of chances created; xGA is the opponent's xG. xGD is the difference. Labels compare the recorded outcome with those chances; they are interpretations, not judgments about fairness.
xPts is our post-match model's 3 × win probability + draw probability using the match's provider xG, not a pre-match forecast.
How each figure on this page is read
Every xG bar is drawn on one fixed scale: full width is 7.20 xG, the same on every card and in every window, so two cards can be compared by eye. A rarer match above that is capped with a hatched end, and the figure beside the bar still gives its value.
An xGD of at least +0.25 is positive; at most −0.25 is negative; between them is approximately even. The band uses unrounded figures and is an editorial guide, not a statistical confidence threshold. The chip on each result reads one of three ways: backed by the chances, with even chances, or against them. Counted over the selection, those three are the xG record on the Chances card — 5–1–0 reads as five results with the chances, one even and none against them.
Goal difference minus xGD says how far a scoreline finished from the chances behind it: a 4:2 won off level chances ran nearly two goals ahead of them. The two callouts under the list name the match that ran furthest each way, and a direction with no result a full goal clear of the chances gets no card rather than a card built from a rounding.
Windows count back from the most recent recorded match, and only matches attached to this club record are included. Home and away mean the provider-designated side, not a verified physical venue. Scores describe recorded play, not shootout advancement. Unverified periods receive no chance comparison.