Sheffield Wednesday vs Stockport County: match statistics
Sheffield Wednesday vs Stockport County: form, goals and key statistics
Game details
Sheffield Wednesday played against Stockport County in EFL League One (England). The game was played on September 19, 2026. Venue: Hillsborough Stadium. Final score: 0:0.
Recent form
Sheffield Wednesday has 3 wins, 1 draw and 1 loss over its last five games, averaging 2.00 points per game. Stockport County has 2 wins, 0 draws and 3 losses, with 1.20 points per game.
Scoring records
Sheffield Wednesday scores 2.17 goals per game and allows 1.00. Stockport County scores 2.67 and allows 1.67. Games in this league average 3.04 goals.
BTTS and goal totals
Both teams score in 67% of Sheffield Wednesday's games and 67% of Stockport County's. The Over 2.5 rates are 67% and 83%, compared with league averages of 64% for BTTS and 59% for Over 2.5.
xG and shots
Stockport County has the higher season xG average, 1.86 to 1.76 per game. Sheffield Wednesday takes 16.0 shots per game, while Stockport County takes 16.5.
First-half and second-half trends
Sheffield Wednesday leads at halftime in 50% of its games and scores 1.00 goals per game after halftime. Stockport County leads at halftime in 50% and scores 1.33 after halftime.
When the teams score
Sheffield Wednesday's most productive scoring window is minutes 31-45+ (4 goals). For Stockport County, it is minutes 16-30 (6 goals). These are past scoring patterns, not predicted goal times.
League scoring profile
League One games average 3.04 goals. Both teams score in 64% of games, and 59% 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
Sheffield Wednesday sit 1st, while Stockport County are eighth; the hosts have won 4 of their 6 matches this season, whereas the visitors have already suffered 3 defeats. Wednesday are particularly dangerous when creating chances at home, averaging 18 shots and 6.67 shots on target per match, with an xG of 2.00—clearly higher than Stockport’s 1.36 away from home. Both teams average 2.33 goals scored and 1.00 conceded in their respective conditions, but the hosts have the better recent record, collecting 10 points from their last five matches compared with the visitors’ 6. Stockport remain efficient, converting 19% of their shots, but a run of three defeats in their last five outings and 9 goals conceded during that period increases the hosts’ chances. The match should be open, but Wednesday’s advantage in possession—63% compared with 56%—and the quality of their chances created point towards a home win.
View the statistical overviewBTTS - will both teams score?
Sheffield Wednesday have recorded BTTS in 100% of their home matches so far and have not kept a single clean sheet, which significantly increases the likelihood of Stockport scoring. The hosts are also highly dangerous in attack: they average 3.0 goals at home, create 2.37 xG, and register 7.0 shots on target per match. Stockport have averaged 2.6 goals in their last five games with 2.02 xG, although their season-long away BTTS rate stands at just 33%. The recent form of both teams supports goals at both ends, as their BTTS rate over the last five matches is 60% for each side, while Stockport conceded an average of 1.8 goals during this period. Although the visitors have kept a clean sheet in 33% of their away matches, Wednesday's attacking potential and their regular defensive lapses make the BTTS scenario more likely.
View BTTS statisticsOver/Under - goals analysis
Sheffield Wednesday average 3.00 total goals in their home matches, and all of the team’s matches so far have gone over 1.5 goals. Stockport also have a 100% record of matches with at least two goals away from home, averaging 2.33 goals per game. The hosts create a high volume of chances, averaging 21.0 shots and 7.0 shots on target, while their average xG is a high 2.37 compared with Stockport’s 1.13 xG conceded away from home. The teams’ last five appearances also support a high-scoring scenario: Sheffield Wednesday have scored an average of 2.2 goals and Stockport 2.6, while Over 2.5 goals landed in 60% and 80% of those matches, respectively. Over 1.5 remains the strongest option, as the data for both sides clearly indicates a very high probability of at least two goals.
View Over/Under statisticsHT/FT - half-time and full-time scenario
Sheffield Wednesday have won 60% of their last five matches and have also been leading at the break in 60% of those games, while Stockport have lost 60% of their recent fixtures. The hosts are creating significantly more chances: their average xG stands at 2.37 compared with Stockport’s 1.36, while they average 7.00 shots on target to the visitors’ 4.67. In recent first halves, Sheffield have averaged 1.2 goals scored and only 0.6 conceded, whereas their opponents have conceded an average of 1.0 goal before the break. Stockport do have a positive signal across the short season as a whole, having led at half-time in 67% of their matches, but current form, home advantage and the hosts’ greater attacking potential provide stronger support for Sheffield to lead at half-time and secure a full-time victory.
View first-half and second-half statisticsStats by half
Game stats
Pre-game profile— what do the season numbers say?
This team profile combines season stats and recent form. In-game statistics appear after the final whistle.
Team stats— who is more efficient?
Compare both teams' attacking and defensive records this season.
Shooting quality
| Sheffield Wednesday | Stockport County | |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (shots on target) | 38% | 35% |
| Chance quality (xG per shot) | 0.11 | 0.11 |
| Finishing (goals per shot on target) | 0.36 | 0.46 |
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 games and season record, overall, at home and away.
Sheffield Wednesday is 67% better for: last-5 form.
2 pts / game - Sheffield Wednesday · 1.2 pts / game - Stockport County
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.
Stockport County is 23% better for: goals scored per game.
2.17 goals / game - Sheffield Wednesday · 2.67 goals / game - Stockport County
Sheffield Wednesday is 67% better for: goals allowed per game.
1 goals / game - Sheffield Wednesday · 1.67 goals / game - Stockport County
Sheffield Wednesday scores in 67% of games (4 of 6 games), while Stockport County keeps a clean sheet in 17% (1 of 6 games).
Stockport County scores in 83% of games (5 of 6 games), while Sheffield Wednesday keeps a clean sheet in 17% (1 of 6 games).
How often they score at least...
How often they concede at least...
* 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
BTTS and goal count
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.
Full game - team comparison (Over)
Over / Under - Sheffield Wednesday
Over / Under - Stockport County
1st half
2nd half
Game 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.
Sheffield Wednesday is 20% better for: first-half form (half-time points).
2 pts / game - Sheffield Wednesday · 1.67 pts / game - Stockport County
Before half-time (1st half)
After half-time (2nd half)
Sheffield Wednesday - second-half results
Leads at halftime in 50% of games and wins 67%. Also wins some games without leading at halftime.
Allows 0.3 more goals per game after halftime, a sign that the defense becomes less effective later in games.
Stockport County - second-half results
Leads at halftime in 50% of games and wins 50%. Also wins some games without leading at halftime.
Defense stays consistent across the full game.
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per game | 2.20 | 1.20 |
| Goals scored / game | 1.2 | 1.0 |
| Goals allowed / game | 0.2 | 0.8 |
| Average goals per game | 1.4 | 1.8 |
| 1 goal | 60% | 60% |
| 2 goals | 40% | 40% |
| 3 goals | 40% | 20% |
| Clean sheet | 80% | 40% |
| No goal | 40% | 60% |
| Goal difference | +5 | +1 |
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per game | 1.40 | 2.00 |
| Goals scored / game | 1.2 | 1.4 |
| Goals allowed / game | 1.0 | 0.8 |
| Average goals per game | 2.2 | 2.2 |
| 1 goal | 80% | 100% |
| 2 goals | 80% | 60% |
| 3 goals | 60% | 40% |
| Clean sheet | 40% | 60% |
| No goal | 40% | 20% |
| Goal difference | +1 | +3 |
* Table colors show frequency: green is common, yellow is moderate and red is rare. They are not team ratings.
Goals by minute— when do goals arrive?
The parts of a game in which both teams score and allow the most goals.
Most dangerous in minutes 31-45 (4 goals). Concedes most in 46-60 (2). Late-goal balance (76-90): 0.
Most dangerous in minutes 16-30 (6 goals). Concedes most in 46-60 (3). Late-goal balance (76-90): +1 - wins late phases.
* 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 from completed games this season.
Game profile
Sheffield Wednesday
Stockport County
* 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 context— is this a high-scoring league?
How both teams compare with league-wide averages (League One).
Teams vs league
| Sheffield Wednesday | Liga | Stockport County | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average goals per game | ▲ 3.17 | 3.04 | ▲ 4.33 |
| Both teams scored | ▲ 67% | 64% | ▲ 67% |
| Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) | ▲ 67% | 59% | ▲ 83% |
| Clean sheets | ▼ 17% | 23% | ▼ 17% |
| Goal before half-time | • 67% | 68% | ▲ 83% |
| Goal after half-time | ▼ 67% | 81% | ▲ 100% |
^ 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.
Referee and managers
Open their season profiles to compare match records, goals and disciplinary trends.
FAQ
What was the result of Sheffield Wednesday vs Stockport County?
The EFL League One match finished Sheffield Wednesday 0:0 Stockport County. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.
What do the goal statistics show before Sheffield Wednesday vs Stockport County?
Sheffield Wednesday score 2.17 goals per game on average and Stockport County 2.67. The EFL League One average is 3.04 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 59% of games. Both teams score in 67% of Sheffield Wednesday's matches and 67% of Stockport County's.
What form are Sheffield Wednesday and Stockport County in?
Over the last 5 games Sheffield Wednesday have a 3-1-1 record (2.00 points per game) and Stockport County 2-0-3 (1.20 points per game).
Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for Sheffield Wednesday vs Stockport County?
The statistical background for Sheffield Wednesday vs Stockport County — 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.


