Colorado Rapids vs Austin: match statistics
Colorado Rapids vs Austin: form, goals and key statistics
Key match information
Colorado Rapids played Austin in MLS (United States). The match was played on 2 August 2026. Venue: Dick's Sporting Goods Park. Final score: 1:0.
Current form
Colorado Rapids: 2-0-3, 1.20 points/match. Austin: 1-0-4, 0.60 points/match.
Goal statistics
Colorado Rapids scores 1.53 and concedes 1.47 goals per match. Austin scores 1.29 and concedes 2.06. League average: 3.23 goals.
BTTS / Over / Under
BTTS: Colorado Rapids 53%, Austin 59%. Over 2.5: Colorado Rapids 53%, Austin 76%. League level: BTTS 62%, Over 2.5 62%.
xG, shots and style
Austin has higher xG: 1.26 vs 1.23. Colorado Rapids: 10.4 shots per match, Austin: 10.8.
Match halves
Colorado Rapids: half-time lead 29%, second-half goals 0.88. Austin: half-time lead 29%, second-half goals 0.65.
Goals by minute
Colorado Rapids: 0-15 (5 goals). Austin: 76-90+ (9 goals). This is historical distribution, not a predicted goal minute.
League context
MLS: 3.23 goals per match, BTTS 62%, Over 2.5 62%.
Head-to-head
No aligned head-to-head sample is available in the database.
Archived pre-match analysis
This analysis was prepared before kick-off. The conclusions use only information available before the match and do not include the final result or post-match statistics.
General match analysis
Colorado Rapids statistically dominate at home: they score on average 2.29 goals per match with an average xG of 1.62, while Austin as the away side scores only 1.11 goals with an average xG of 1.09. Defensively the gap is even more pronounced — Colorado concedes 1.29 goals at home with xG against 1.15, Austin concedes 3.11 on the road with xG against 2.41, meaning the visitors are significantly more exposed to conceding. Colorado creates far more chances (14.43 shots and 5.00 on target per game vs 9.44 and 3.22 for Austin), and their conversion rate of 16% is higher than the visitors’ 12%, which translates to roughly 5 additional shots and about 1.8 more shots on target for the home side. Additionally Austin has not won away (0% away wins), has 67% away losses and a goal differential of -18, while Colorado at home has a 57% win rate and a positive differential of +7. Considering the hosts’ superior offensive and defensive metrics and recent form (Colorado 1.2 points per game and 2 wins in the last 5 vs Austin 0.6 points per game and 1 win), I forecast a home victory.
View the statistical overviewBTTS - will both teams score?
The Both Teams To Score (BTTS) scenario is more likely: Austin has BTTS in 67% of their matches this season, Colorado in 50%, and the league BTTS rate is 60%, favoring the “Yes” option. Austin concedes an average of 3.11 goals per game this season and 2.8 in the last 5 matches (14 goals conceded), while Colorado scores an average of 1.5 goals per game this season and 1.0 in the last 5; their xG_for is 1.46 versus Austin’s xG_against of 2.41, suggesting Colorado has a realistic chance to score. Despite defensive issues, Austin has scored 22 goals this season (1.11 per game) and has xG_for 1.09, and away they record 0% clean sheets, so it is difficult for them to keep a clean sheet against Colorado’s average of 12.25 shots and 5.0 on target. Additionally, all of Austin’s matches this season have been over 2.5 goals (100%), and the combination of over 2.5 and BTTS occurs in 67% of their games, increasing the likelihood of an exchange of goals. Based on the above figures I pick BTTS = 'Yes' and estimate its probability at approximately 72%.
View BTTS statisticsOver/Under - goals analysis
Statistics clearly point to a goals match: Austin concedes an average of 3.11 goals per game with xG against 2.41, while Colorado at home produces xG 1.46 and scores on average 1.50 goals per game — yielding expected goals for Colorado ≈1.94 ((1.46+2.41)/2). Austin has xG for 1.09 versus Colorado xG against 1.40, translating to an expected ~1.25 for Austin ((1.09+1.40)/2), and the total expected goals are about 3.19, which is above the 2.5 threshold. Season percentages confirm this: 50% of Colorado’s home games and 100% of Austin’s away games finished Over 2.5 goals, and in the last 5 matches Austin has conceded 14 goals (2.8 per game) versus 5 conceded by Colorado (1.0 per game). Colorado creates more chances (avg. 12.25 shots and 5.0 on target) than Austin (9.44/3.22), with an identical conversion rate of 12%, indicating the hosts can exploit Austin’s weak defense. As a result the strongest signal from the data is Over 2.5 (pick: Over 2.5); Over 1.5 is rated very high (88%), and Over 3.5 has a moderate probability (43%).
View Over/Under statisticsHT/FT - half-time and full-time scenario
At half-time a draw appears most likely: the home side are level at the break in 63% of matches and average 0.63 goals scored by half-time with 0.38 conceded, favoring low-scoring draws at the interval. Over the full match Colorado hold a clear advantage — they have a 50% win rate this season and 1.75 points per game, while Austin have yet to record a win (0% wins) and concede an average of 3.11 goals per game. Second-half metrics reinforce this picture: the hosts score an average of 1.38 goals after the break and in 75% of their matches at least one goal is scored post-half-time, whereas the visitors concede an average of 2.11 goals in the second half and in 89% of their matches a goal is scored after the break. Additionally Colorado have higher xG (1.46 vs 1.09) and average 5.0 shots on target compared to the visitors' 3.22, so the hosts create more quality chances, increasing the likelihood of a turnaround after half-time. On this basis the most probable scenario is a draw at half-time and a home win at full-time, hence the HT/FT selection X/1.
View first-half and second-half statisticsHalf-by-half
Match statistics
Pre-match profile— what do the season numbers say?
This is a team profile based on season data and form. Match-flow statistics are shown only after the fixture is played.
Team stats— who is more efficient?
Attack and defence comparison for both teams in the current season.
Shooting quality
| Colorado Rapids | Austin | |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (shots on target) | 37% | 38% |
| Chance quality (xG per shot) | 0.12 | 0.12 |
| Finishing (goals per shot on target) | 0.39 | 0.32 |
xG per shot around 0.08 usually means long-range attempts; 0.15+ usually means box chances. The style label comes from possession, shot volume and conversion.
* xG (expected goals) says how many goals a team should score from its chances. If actual goals are above xG, finishing is above average; if below xG, chances are being missed.
Team form— who is in better shape?
Last five matches and season record, overall and split by home and away matches.
Colorado Rapids is 100% better for: last-5 form.
1.2 pts / match - Colorado Rapids · 0.6 pts / match - Austin
Goals— how do both teams score and concede?
How many goals both teams score and concede, plus how often they keep a clean sheet or fail to score.
Colorado Rapids is 19% better for: goals scored per match.
1.53 goals / match - Colorado Rapids · 1.29 goals / match - Austin
Colorado Rapids is 40% better for: goals conceded per match.
1.47 goals / match - Colorado Rapids · 2.06 goals / match - Austin
Colorado Rapids scores in 71% of matches (12 of 17 matches), while Austin keeps a clean sheet in 24% (4 of 17 matches).
Austin scores in 76% of matches (13 of 17 matches), while Colorado Rapids keeps a clean sheet in 24% (4 of 17 matches).
How often they score at least...
How often they concede at least...
* Statistics include both teams' home and away matches in the current season.
Both teams scored (BTTS)— how often do both teams score?
How often both teams' matches have goals on both sides, compared with the league average.
Goal patterns
BTTS and goal count
Goal count (Over/Under)— how often do these matches cross the goal lines?
How often matches involving these teams clear goal thresholds, in the full match and in each half.
Full match - team comparison (Over)
Over / Under — Colorado Rapids
Over / Under — Austin
1st half
2nd half
Match halves— when do the teams score more often?
How teams split performance between first and second half: goals, points, clean sheets and half-time state.
Austin is 9% better for: first-half form (half-time points).
1.24 pts / match - Colorado Rapids · 1.35 pts / match - Austin
Before half-time (1st half)
After half-time (2nd half)
Colorado Rapids - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 29% of matches and wins 35%. Also wins matches without a half-time lead.
Defence stays stable across the full match.
Austin - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 29% of matches and wins 24%. Usually protects the lead until full-time.
Concedes 0.6 more goals per match after half-time - defensive level drops in the second half.
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 1.20 | 1.00 |
| Goals scored / match | 0.6 | 0.2 |
| Goals conceded / match | 0.6 | 0.4 |
| Average goals in match | 1.2 | 0.6 |
| 1 goal | 60% | 60% |
| 2 goals | 40% | 0% |
| 3 goals | 20% | 0% |
| Clean sheet | 60% | 60% |
| No goal | 40% | 80% |
| Goal difference | 0 | -1 |
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 0.80 | 0.80 |
| Goals scored / match | 0.4 | 0.4 |
| Goals conceded / match | 1.4 | 1.4 |
| Average goals in match | 1.8 | 1.8 |
| 1 goal | 100% | 80% |
| 2 goals | 60% | 80% |
| 3 goals | 20% | 20% |
| Clean sheet | 20% | 40% |
| No goal | 60% | 80% |
| Goal difference | -5 | -5 |
* Colours in tables show event frequency: green is common, yellow is moderate, red is rare. It is frequency, not a team rating.
Goals by minute— when do goals arrive?
Match phases in which both teams most often score and concede.
Most dangerous in minutes 0-15 (5 goli). Concedes most in 76-90 (7). Late-goal balance (76-90): -2 - late phases are a weakness.
Most dangerous in minutes 76-90 (9 goli). Concedes most in 76-90 (16). Late-goal balance (76-90): -7 - late phases are a weakness.
* Buckets 31-45 and 76-90 include added-time goals.
Additional team indicators— what do xG, efficiency and form show?
A comparison of chance quality, results and trends based on completed matches from the current season.
Match profile
Colorado Rapids
Austin
* The estimated goal total and split, BTTS estimate, 0:0 risk and goal range are calculated from public season averages and frequencies for both teams. This is a statistical match profile, not a private model prediction or betting pick. The remaining indicators describe completed matches from the season.
League context— is this a high-scoring league?
How both teams compare with league-wide averages (MLS).
Teams vs league
| Colorado Rapids | Liga | Austin | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average goals in match | ▼ 3.00 | 3.23 | ▲ 3.35 |
| Both teams scored | ▼ 53% | 62% | ▼ 59% |
| Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) | ▼ 53% | 62% | ▲ 76% |
| Clean sheets | ▲ 24% | 21% | ▲ 24% |
| Goal before half-time | ▼ 71% | 77% | ▲ 82% |
| Goal after half-time | ▼ 76% | 80% | ▲ 82% |
^ green = above league average, ˇ red = below league average. This shows direction of the gap, not a team rating.
Lineups and player events
Verified starters, substitutes and recorded player events for this match.
Home team
Starting lineup
Away team
Starting lineup
Match timeline
Goals, cards and substitutions arranged in chronological order.
FAQ
What was the result of Colorado Rapids vs Austin?
The MLS match finished Colorado Rapids 1:0 Austin. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.
What do the goal statistics show before Colorado Rapids vs Austin?
Colorado Rapids score 1.53 goals per game on average and Austin 1.29. The MLS average is 3.23 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 62% of games. Both teams score in 53% of Colorado Rapids's matches and 59% of Austin's.
What form are Colorado Rapids and Austin in?
Over the last 5 games Colorado Rapids have a 2-0-3 record (1.20 points per game) and Austin 1-0-4 (0.60 points per game).
Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for Colorado Rapids vs Austin?
The statistical background for Colorado Rapids vs Austin — form, head-to-head, goals, BTTS and Over/Under — is on this page. The tip with full reasoning and a value assessment is in the NoFluffPicks app.