Arba Minch Kenema vs Ethiopia Nigd Bank: match statistics
Arba Minch Kenema vs Ethiopia Nigd Bank: form, goals and key statistics
Key match information
Arba Minch Kenema played Ethiopia Nigd Bank in Ethiopia Premier League (Ethiopia). The match was played on 30 April 2026. Final score: 0:0.
Current form
Arba Minch Kenema: 1-2-2, 1.00 points/match. Ethiopia Nigd Bank: 2-1-2, 1.40 points/match.
Goal statistics
Arba Minch Kenema scores 0.75 and concedes 1.21 goals per match. Ethiopia Nigd Bank scores 1.25 and concedes 1.25. League average: 1.79 goals.
BTTS / Over / Under
BTTS: Arba Minch Kenema 46%, Ethiopia Nigd Bank 61%. Over 2.5: Arba Minch Kenema 25%, Ethiopia Nigd Bank 46%. League level: BTTS 42%, Over 2.5 27%.
xG, shots and style
xG is very similar for both teams. Arba Minch Kenema: 7.2 shots per match, Ethiopia Nigd Bank: 6.4.
Match halves
Arba Minch Kenema: half-time lead 18%, second-half goals 0.36. Ethiopia Nigd Bank: half-time lead 25%, second-half goals 0.75.
Goals by minute
Arba Minch Kenema: 31-45+ (5 goals). Ethiopia Nigd Bank: 76-90+ (10 goals). This is historical distribution, not a predicted goal minute.
League context
Ethiopia Premier League: 1.79 goals per match, BTTS 42%, Over 2.5 27%.
Head-to-head
Before this fixture, 1 previous H2H matches were available: 0-0-1. Average goals 4.00, BTTS 100%.
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
I back the away win (2). Ethiopia Nigd Bank have 35 goals this season vs 21 for Arba Minch and have scored 7 goals in their last 5 matches compared to the hosts’ 5; the visitors’ last 5 form is 2 wins, 1 draw, 2 losses, while the hosts are 1 win, 2 draws, 2 losses. Away, the visitors average 2.43 shots on target with a conversion rate of 17%, whereas the hosts at home average 1.85 SOT and a 9% conversion, indicating an efficiency edge for the away side. The hosts have not won at home yet (0% home wins) and fail to score in 57% of home matches, while the visitors are goalless in only 21% of away fixtures; both defenses concede over 1 goal per game (1.5 for the hosts vs 1.36 for the visitors), so the advantage should favor the more clinical attack. With similar average xG (1.14 home vs 1.09 away), the decisive factors are finishing and recent trends — points per game over the last 5 are 1.0 for the hosts and 1.4 for the visitors — hence a higher probability of an away victory.
View the statistical overviewBTTS - will both teams score?
I back BTTS - Yes — the seasonal team profiles favor both teams scoring: the away side has 71% of matches with both teams scoring and only 14% clean sheets, while the home side has a seasonal BTTS rate of 50%. Home average goals scored 1.5 vs opponents’ average goals conceded 1.36 (1.5 vs 1.36), and home xG is 1.25 against away xG conceded 1.35, indicating a realistic chance for the home side to score. Away average goals scored 1.0 vs home average goals conceded 1.14 (1.0 vs 1.14), so the visitors also have conditions to score, supported by average shots per match 7.69 for home and 5.79 for away and shots on target 3.08 vs 2.43. A counterargument is the away form in the last 5 matches — only 20% BTTS in their last 5 vs 60% for the home side, which lowers confidence and suggests moderate risk of error. Considering the advantage in seasonal metrics (50% and 71%), average xG/shots and low away clean sheets, I assess BTTS probability at 65% vs 35% and recommend 'yes' as the strongest signal.
View BTTS statisticsOver/Under - goals analysis
The xG-based model projects 1.30 goals for Arba Minch and 1.13 for Ethiopia Nigd Bank (home xG 1.25 vs xG conceded to visitors 1.35; away xG 1.09 vs xG conceded to hosts 1.16), totaling 2.43 goals. The hosts average 7.69 shots (3.08 on target) with an 18% conversion, roughly translating to ~1.38 goals from shots and corroborating the seasonal average of 1.5 goals scored; the visitors average 5.79 shots (2.43 on target) with a 17% conversion (~0.98), consistent with my forecast of 1.13. Season-long stats show both teams have had 79% of matches with over 1.5 goals, and over 0.5 occurred in 86% and 93% of their games, strongly supporting at least two goals in the fixture. Seasonal over 2.5 is 50% for the hosts and 43% for the visitors (average ~46%), and in the last 5 matches for both sides over 2.5 was 40%, so the 2.5 line is balanced, while over 3.5 (29%/21%) looks unlikely. Based on this, I recommend Over 1.5 as the strongest signal (estimated probability ~83%), whereas Over 2.5 and 3.5 are less certain (approx. 48% and 24%).
View Over/Under statisticsHT/FT - half-time and full-time scenario
The home side holds a clear advantage in seasonal metrics: they average 1.5 goals per match versus 1.0 for the visitors and concede 1.14 compared to 1.36; home win rate is 43% against the opponents’ 14%. At half-time the hosts led in 6 matches (43%) while the visitors led only once (7%); the average first-half goals are 0.64 for Arba Minch versus 0.36 for Ethiopia Nigd Bank, indicating a home advantage already in the opening half. Additionally, the hosts have higher xG (1.25 vs 1.09) and more on-target shots (3.08 vs 2.43), and 86% of home matches feature at least one goal before the break, so a lead at the break for the home team is realistic. In the second half Arba Minch scores on average 0.86 goals and earns 1.79 points after the break versus 0.64 goals and 1.14 points for the visitors, which increases the likelihood of maintaining the lead and converting it into a win. On that basis I select the scenario: home team leading at half-time and home team winning after 90 minutes (1/1).
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
| Arba Minch Kenema | Ethiopia Nigd Bank | |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (shots on target) | 32% | 41% |
| Chance quality (xG per shot) | 0.16 | 0.18 |
| Finishing (goals per shot on target) | 0.32 | 0.48 |
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.
Ethiopia Nigd Bank is 40% better for: last-5 form.
1 pts / match - Arba Minch Kenema · 1.4 pts / match - Ethiopia Nigd Bank
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.
Ethiopia Nigd Bank is 67% better for: goals scored per match.
0.75 goals / match - Arba Minch Kenema · 1.25 goals / match - Ethiopia Nigd Bank
Arba Minch Kenema scores in 54% of matches (15 of 28 matches), while Ethiopia Nigd Bank keeps a clean sheet in 21% (6 of 28 matches).
Ethiopia Nigd Bank scores in 71% of matches (20 of 28 matches), while Arba Minch Kenema keeps a clean sheet in 25% (7 of 28 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 - Arba Minch Kenema
Over / Under - Ethiopia Nigd Bank
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.
Ethiopia Nigd Bank is 19% better for: first-half form (half-time points).
0.93 pts / match - Arba Minch Kenema · 1.11 pts / match - Ethiopia Nigd Bank
Before half-time (1st half)
After half-time (2nd half)
Arba Minch Kenema - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 18% of matches and wins 14%. Sometimes loses the lead after half-time.
Defence stays stable across the full match.
Ethiopia Nigd Bank - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 25% of matches and wins 29%. Also wins matches without a half-time lead.
Defence stays stable across the full match.
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 0.60 | 1.60 |
| Goals scored / match | 0.6 | 0.4 |
| Goals conceded / match | 1.2 | 0.2 |
| Average goals in match | 1.8 | 0.6 |
| 1 goal | 100% | 60% |
| 2 goals | 60% | 0% |
| 3 goals | 20% | 0% |
| Clean sheet | 20% | 80% |
| No goal | 60% | 60% |
| Goal difference | -3 | +1 |
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 1.40 | 1.60 |
| Goals scored / match | 0.8 | 0.6 |
| Goals conceded / match | 0.6 | 0.4 |
| Average goals in match | 1.4 | 1.0 |
| 1 goal | 80% | 60% |
| 2 goals | 40% | 20% |
| 3 goals | 20% | 20% |
| Clean sheet | 40% | 60% |
| No goal | 60% | 60% |
| Goal difference | +1 | +1 |
* 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 31-45 (5 goals). Concedes most in 0-15 (7). Late-goal balance (76-90): -3 - late phases are a weakness.
Most dangerous in minutes 76-90 (10 goals). Concedes most in 16-30 (7). Late-goal balance (76-90): +4 - 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 based on completed matches from the current season.
Match profile
Arba Minch Kenema
Ethiopia Nigd Bank
* 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 (Ethiopia Premier League).
Teams vs league
| Arba Minch Kenema | Liga | Ethiopia Nigd Bank | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average goals in match | ▲ 1.96 | 1.79 | ▲ 2.50 |
| Both teams scored | ▲ 46% | 42% | ▲ 61% |
| Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) | ▼ 25% | 27% | ▲ 46% |
| Clean sheets | ▼ 25% | 39% | ▼ 21% |
| Goal before half-time | ▲ 68% | 54% | ▲ 79% |
| Goal after half-time | ▼ 54% | 59% | ▲ 71% |
^ green = above league average, ˇ red = below league average. This shows direction of the gap, not a team rating.
Head-to-head
Previous meeting: Arba Minch Kenema 0 - 0 - 1 Ethiopia Nigd Bank. Average goals 4.00, both teams scored in 100% matches.
FAQ
What was the result of Arba Minch Kenema vs Ethiopia Nigd Bank?
The Ethiopia Premier League match finished Arba Minch Kenema 0:0 Ethiopia Nigd Bank. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.
What do the goal statistics show before Arba Minch Kenema vs Ethiopia Nigd Bank?
Arba Minch Kenema score 0.75 goals per game on average and Ethiopia Nigd Bank 1.25. The Ethiopia Premier League average is 1.79 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 27% of games. Both teams score in 46% of Arba Minch Kenema's matches and 61% of Ethiopia Nigd Bank's.
What form are Arba Minch Kenema and Ethiopia Nigd Bank in?
Over the last 5 games Arba Minch Kenema have a 1-2-2 record (1.00 points per game) and Ethiopia Nigd Bank 2-1-2 (1.40 points per game).
Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for Arba Minch Kenema vs Ethiopia Nigd Bank?
Here you can check the pre-match numbers for Arba Minch Kenema vs Ethiopia Nigd Bank: form, H2H, goals and Over/Under. The pick itself, value and reasoning are published in the NoFluffPicks app.


