Italy - Serie AData current as of September 11, 2026

Pisa vs Como: match statistics

Pisa crest
Pisa
0 : 3half-time 0:0
Como crest
Como
120%(4.90)
X25%(3.50)
255%(1.72)

Como decisively outperforms Pisa across every statistical metric. The hosts sit 19th in the table with just 1 win all season and disastrous home form (11% win rate, failing to score in 89% of matches). Pisa averages a meager 0.11 goals per home game, while Como posts a solid 1.22 goals average on the road. The visitors occupy 6th place with an 8-6-3 record and significantly superior form (1.8 PPG in the last 5 matches vs 0.4 for Pisa). Como also dominates in possession (59% vs 44%), shot efficiency, and xG (1.41 vs 1.1). The gulf in class between these sides is evident, making a Como victory the most likely scenario.

Pisa vs Como: form, goals and key statistics

Game details

Pisa played against Como in Serie A (Italy). The game was played on January 6, 2026. Final score: 0:3.

Recent form

Pisa has 0 wins, 2 draws and 3 losses over its last five games, averaging 0.40 points per game. Como has 3 wins, 0 draws and 2 losses, with 1.80 points per game.

Scoring records

Pisa scores 0.72 goals per game and allows 1.39. Como scores 1.35 and allows 0.71. Games in this league average 2.31 goals.

BTTS and goal totals

Both teams score in 39% of Pisa's games and 35% of Como's. The Over 2.5 rates are 33% and 29%, compared with league averages of 47% for BTTS and 43% for Over 2.5.

xG and shots

Como has the higher season xG average, 1.53 to 1.05 per game. Pisa takes 9.9 shots per game, while Como takes 13.8.

First-half and second-half trends

Pisa leads at halftime in 11% of its games and scores 0.39 goals per game after halftime. Como leads at halftime in 35% and scores 0.82 after halftime.

When the teams score

Pisa's most productive scoring window is minutes 76-90+ (4 goals). For Como, it is minutes 61-75 (6 goals). These are past scoring patterns, not predicted goal times.

League scoring profile

Serie A games average 2.31 goals. Both teams score in 47% of games, and 43% finish with at least three goals.

Head-to-head record

There is not enough head-to-head history for a meaningful comparison.

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

Como decisively outperforms Pisa across every statistical metric. The hosts sit 19th in the table with just 1 win all season and disastrous home form (11% win rate, failing to score in 89% of matches). Pisa averages a meager 0.11 goals per home game, while Como posts a solid 1.22 goals average on the road. The visitors occupy 6th place with an 8-6-3 record and significantly superior form (1.8 PPG in the last 5 matches vs 0.4 for Pisa). Como also dominates in possession (59% vs 44%), shot efficiency, and xG (1.41 vs 1.1). The gulf in class between these sides is evident, making a Como victory the most likely scenario.

View the statistical overview

Stats by half

0 : 0
First half
0 : 3
Second half

Game stats

27Possession (%)73
PisaComo
10Shots15
PisaComo
4Shots on target7
PisaComo
1.16xG1.92
PisaComo
1Corners5
PisaComo
34Dangerous attacks66
PisaComo
9Fouls13
PisaComo
2Cards2
PisaComo

Pre-game profilewhat do the season numbers say?

This team profile combines season stats and recent form. In-game statistics appear after the final whistle.

0.72Goals scored / game1.35
PisaComo
1.39Goals allowed / game0.71
PisaComo
41%Average possession60%
PisaComo
2.17Shots on target / game4.88
PisaComo

Team statswho is more efficient?

Compare both teams' attacking and defensive records this season.

9.94Shots per game13.76
PisaComo
2.17Shots on target4.88
PisaComo
7.3%Shot conversion9.8%
PisaComo
41%Possession60%
PisaComo
1.05xG for1.53
PisaComo
1.68xG against1.19
PisaComo

Shooting quality

Pisa: BalancedComo: Balanced
PisaComo
Accuracy (shots on target)22%35%
Chance quality (xG per shot)0.110.11
Finishing (goals per shot on target)0.330.28

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 formwho is in better shape?

Last five games and season record, overall, at home and away.

Como is 350% better for: last-5 form.

0.4 pts / game - Pisa · 1.8 pts / game - Como

Pisa
LLDLD
No win in the last 5 games
Season result split
6% W50% D44% L
Season (W-D-L)
1-9-8
0.67 pts / game · goal difference -12
Last 5 (W-D-L)
0-2-3
0.40 pts / game
Record at home (W-D-L)
1-3-5
Last 5 at home
1-1-3
DWLLL
Last 5 games - averages
Goals scored: 0.6Goals conceded: 1.4xG: 1.13Opponent xG: 1.50BTTS: 40%Over 2.5: 20%
Como
WLLWW
Season result split
47% W35% D18% L
Season (W-D-L)
8-6-3
1.76 pts / game · goal difference +11
Last 5 (W-D-L)
3-0-2
1.80 pts / game
Record away (W-D-L)
3-3-3
Last 5 away
2-1-2
DWLLW
Last 5 games - averages
Goals scored: 1.2Goals conceded: 1.0xG: 1.60Opponent xG: 1.21BTTS: 0%Over 2.5: 40%

Goalshow 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.

Como is 88% better for: goals scored per game.

0.72 goals / game - Pisa · 1.35 goals / game - Como

Como is 96% better for: goals allowed per game.

1.39 goals / game - Pisa · 0.71 goals / game - Como

Pisa scoring profile: more difficult

Pisa scores in 44% of games (8 of 18 meczów), while Como keeps a clean sheet in 47% (8 of 17 meczów).

Como scoring profile: strong

Como scores in 65% of games (11 of 17 meczów), while Pisa keeps a clean sheet in 22% (4 of 18 meczów).

13Goals scored (season)23
PisaComo
25Goals conceded (season)12
PisaComo
2.11Average goals per game2.06
PisaComo
3Goals scored (last 5)6
PisaComo
7Goals conceded (last 5)5
PisaComo

How often they score at least...

44%1 goal65%
PisaComo
28%2 goals41%
PisaComo
0%3 goals18%
PisaComo
0%4 goals6%
PisaComo

How often they concede at least...

78%1 goal53%
PisaComo
44%2 goals6%
PisaComo
11%3 goals6%
PisaComo
6%4 goals6%
PisaComo

* Statistics include both teams' home and away games this season.

Both teams scored (BTTS)how often do both teams score?

How often games involving these teams produce goals at both ends, compared with the league average.

Goal patterns

17%BTTS at half-time18%
PisaComo
6%BTTS in both halves0%
PisaComo
11%Scored in both halves29%
PisaComo

BTTS and goal count

28%Min. 3 goals and BTTS18%
PisaComo
6%Min. 3 goals without BTTS12%
PisaComo
40%BTTS - last 50%
PisaComo

Goal count (Over/Under)how often do these games cross the goal lines?

See how often games involving these teams clear each goal line, for the full game and each half.

1st half

56%Min. 1 goal before half-time65%
PisaComo
22%Min. 2 goals before half-time18%
PisaComo
11%Min. 3 goals before half-time0%
PisaComo

2nd half

61%Min. 1 goal after half-time71%
PisaComo
33%Min. 2 goals after half-time35%
PisaComo
17%Min. 3 goals after half-time12%
PisaComo

Game halveswhen do the teams score more often?

How teams split performance between first and second half: goals, points, clean sheets and half-time state.

Como is 69% better for: first-half form (half-time points).

0.94 pts / game - Pisa · 1.59 pts / game - Como

Pisa - half-time state
11% leading61% draw28% trailing
Como - half-time state
35% leading53% draw12% trailing

Before half-time (1st half)

0.94Points per game (1st half)1.59
PisaComo
0.33Goals scored (1st half)0.53
PisaComo
0.61Goals conceded (1st half)0.29
PisaComo
0.94Average goals (1st half)0.82
PisaComo
56%Clean sheet before half-time71%
PisaComo
72%No goal before half-time47%
PisaComo

After half-time (2nd half)

0.83Points per game (2nd half)1.53
PisaComo
0.39Goals scored (2nd half)0.82
PisaComo
0.78Goals conceded (2nd half)0.41
PisaComo
1.17Average goals (2nd half)1.24
PisaComo
44%Clean sheet after half-time71%
PisaComo
72%No goal after half-time59%
PisaComo

Pisa - second-half results

11% W50% D39% L
17
Half-time points
6
Half-time goals
-5
Goal difference (1st half)
15
Second-half points
-7
Goal difference (2nd half)
0.94
PPG before half-time
Lead holding55%

Leads at halftime in 11% of games and wins 6%. Sometimes gives up a halftime lead.

Defense after halftime+0.2

Allows 0.2 more goals per game after halftime, a sign that the defense becomes less effective later in games.

Como - second-half results

41% W29% D29% L
27
Half-time points
9
Half-time goals
+4
Goal difference (1st half)
26
Second-half points
+7
Goal difference (2nd half)
1.59
PPG before half-time
Lead holding134%

Leads at halftime in 35% of games and wins 47%. Also wins some games without leading at halftime.

Defense after halftime+0.1

Allows 0.1 more goals per game after halftime, a sign that the defense becomes less effective later in games.

Pisa - last 5 games by half
1st half2nd half
Points per game1.200.40
Goals scored / game0.40.2
Goals allowed / game0.41.0
Average goals per game0.81.2
1 goal60%60%
2 goals20%40%
3 goals0%20%
Clean sheet60%40%
No goal60%80%
Goal difference0-4
Half-time: 20% leading - 60% draw - 20% trailing
2nd half: 0% won - 40% draw - 60% lost
BTTS at half-time (last 5): 20% - Half-time goals total: 2
Como - last 5 games by half
1st half2nd half
Points per game2.001.40
Goals scored / game0.60.6
Goals allowed / game0.20.8
Average goals per game0.81.4
1 goal80%80%
2 goals0%40%
3 goals0%20%
Clean sheet80%60%
No goal40%60%
Goal difference+2-1
Half-time: 60% leading - 20% draw - 20% trailing
2nd half: 40% won - 20% draw - 40% lost
BTTS at half-time (last 5): 0% - Half-time goals total: 3

* Table colors show frequency: green is common, yellow is moderate and red is rare. They are not team ratings.

Goals by minutewhen do goals arrive?

The parts of a game in which both teams score and allow the most goals.

Pisa
ScoredConceded
2
4
0-15
2
1
16-30
2
6
31-45
2
4
46-60
1
5
61-75
4
5
76-90

Most dangerous in minutes 76-90 (4 goals). Concedes most in 31-45 (6). Late-goal balance (76-90): -1 - late phases are a weakness.

Como
ScoredConceded
4
3
0-15
3
1
16-30
2
1
31-45
3
3
46-60
6
1
61-75
5
3
76-90

Most dangerous in minutes 61-75 (6 goals). Concedes most in 0-15 (3). Late-goal balance (76-90): +2 - wins late phases.

* Buckets 31-45 and 76-90 include added-time goals.

Additional team indicatorswhat do xG, efficiency and form show?

A comparison of chance quality, results and trends from completed games this season.

Game profile

2.08
Estimated goals
attack vs. opponent defense
0.7 : 1.4
Estimated goal split
home : away
90%
Pace vs league
100% = league average
37%
Both teams scored (BTTS)
average from both teams' seasons
-100%
Derby effect
H2H goals vs typical matches
29%
BTTS estimate
from both teams' scoring frequency
20%
0:0 risk
about 1 in 5 matches
0-1
Most common goal range
attack vs. defense for both teams

Pisa

Net xG balance
Difference between the quality of chances created and allowed per match.
-0.63
Results compared with xG
Difference between the actual goal balance and the balance suggested by xG.
-0.04
Points compared with goal balance
Comparison between collected points and the points implied by the team's goal balance.
+0.5 pts
Finishing efficiency
Does the team convert chances? Positive means it scores more than the quality of chances suggests.
-0.33
Defensive efficiency
Does the defense or goalkeeper outperform the chances allowed? A positive value means the team allows fewer goals than its xGA suggests.
+0.29
Attack vs league
How much the team scores compared with the league average for this role. 120% means 20% above average.
59%
Defense vs. league
Goals allowed compared with the league average. An 80% score means 20% fewer goals allowed.
129%
Form trend
Compares points from the last five games with the full-season average.
-0.27
Stronger second half?
How many more goals the team scores after half-time than before it.
+0.1
Late goals
31% of this team's goals come in minutes 76-90. For comparison, 15% come in the first quarter-hour.
31%

Como

Net xG balance
Difference between the quality of chances created and allowed per match.
+0.34
Results compared with xG
Difference between the actual goal balance and the balance suggested by xG.
+0.30
Points compared with goal balance
Comparison between collected points and the points implied by the team's goal balance.
-10.1 pts
Finishing efficiency
Does the team convert chances? Positive means it scores more than the quality of chances suggests.
-0.18
Defensive efficiency
Does the defense or goalkeeper outperform the chances allowed? A positive value means the team allows fewer goals than its xGA suggests.
+0.48
Attack vs league
How much the team scores compared with the league average for this role. 120% means 20% above average.
125%
Defense vs. league
Goals allowed compared with the league average. An 80% score means 20% fewer goals allowed.
58%
Form trend
Compares points from the last five games with the full-season average.
+0.04
Stronger second half?
How many more goals the team scores after half-time than before it.
+0.3
Late goals
22% of this team's goals come in minutes 76-90. For comparison, 17% come in the first quarter-hour.
22%

* The estimated goal total and split, BTTS estimate, 0:0 risk and goal range use public season averages and frequencies for both teams. This is a statistical game profile, not a private model prediction or betting pick. The remaining indicators describe completed games from the season.

League contextis this a high-scoring league?

How both teams compare with league-wide averages (Serie A).

Teams vs league

PisaLigaComo
Average goals per game 2.112.31 2.06
Both teams scored 39%47% 35%
Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) 33%43% 29%
Clean sheets 22%32% 47%
Goal before half-time 56%64% 65%
Goal after half-time 61%74% 71%

^ green = above league average, ˇ red = below league average. This shows direction of the gap, not a team rating.

2.31
Average goals per game
47%
Both teams scored
43%
Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5)
32%
Clean sheets
1.23
Home goals / game
1.08
Away goals / game
+14%
Home attack advantage
+12%
Home defensive advantage
+7%
Total home advantage
Goals in 1st half (whole league)
64%
1 goal
28%
2 goals
10%
3 goals
1%
4 goals
Goals in 2nd half (whole league)
74%
1 goal
39%
2 goals
14%
3 goals
2%
4 goals

Lineups and player events

Verified starters, substitutes and recorded player events for this match.

Match timeline

Goals, cards and substitutions arranged in chronological order.

  1. PisaYellow cardMichel Aebischer
  2. ComoYellow cardLucas Da Cunha
  3. ComoYellow cardJacobo Ramón Naveros
  4. PisaSubstitutionOn: Stefano MoreoOff: Mattéo Tramoni
  5. ComoSubstitutionOn: Martin BaturinaOff: Nikolas-Gerrit Kühn
  6. PisaYellow cardFrancesco Coppola

Referee and managers

Open their season profiles to compare match records, goals and disciplinary trends.

Referee context

See how often this referee shows cards, awards penalties and how their matches tend to finish.

Luca PairettoMatches officiated: 10
5.9Cards per match
0Penalties per match
1 / X / 240%Home wins30%Draws30%Away wins

FAQ

What was the result of Pisa vs Como?

The Serie A match finished Pisa 0:3 Como. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.

What do the goal statistics show before Pisa vs Como?

Pisa score 0.72 goals per game on average and Como 1.35. The Serie A average is 2.31 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 43% of games. Both teams score in 39% of Pisa's matches and 35% of Como's.

What form are Pisa and Como in?

Over the last 5 games Pisa have a 0-2-3 record (0.40 points per game) and Como 3-0-2 (1.80 points per game).

Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for Pisa vs Como?

Here you can check the pre-match numbers for Pisa vs Como: form, H2H, goals and Over/Under. The pick itself, value and reasoning are published in the NoFluffPicks app.