CD Mafra vs Amarante: match statistics
CD Mafra vs Amarante: form, goals and key statistics
Key match information
CD Mafra played Amarante in Liga 3 (Portugal). The match was played on 19 April 2026. Final score: 1:4.
Current form
CD Mafra: 2-0-3, 1.20 points/match. Amarante: 3-2-0, 2.20 points/match.
Goal statistics
CD Mafra scores 1.37 and concedes 1.22 goals per match. Amarante scores 1.15 and concedes 0.89. League average: 2.20 goals.
BTTS / Over / Under
BTTS: CD Mafra 63%, Amarante 44%. Over 2.5: CD Mafra 44%, Amarante 37%. League level: BTTS 48%, Over 2.5 38%.
xG, shots and style
CD Mafra has higher xG: 1.36 vs 1.05. CD Mafra: 9.8 shots per match, Amarante: 8.0.
Match halves
CD Mafra: half-time lead 33%, second-half goals 0.78. Amarante: half-time lead 22%, second-half goals 0.78.
Goals by minute
CD Mafra: 76-90+ (9 goals). Amarante: 76-90+ (10 goals). This is historical distribution, not a predicted goal minute.
League context
Liga 3: 2.20 goals per match, BTTS 48%, Over 2.5 38%.
Head-to-head
Before this fixture, 1 previous H2H matches were available: 0-0-1. Average goals 1.00, BTTS 0%.
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
Mafra has a strong home profile: 62% of home matches won, averaging 1.54 goals scored and only 0.92 conceded, with home xG 1.36 versus xG against 1.07, confirming offensive efficiency and relative defensive solidity. Amarante arrive in good form — in the last 5 matches they have 3 wins and 2 draws, scored 7 goals in that period and have a 5-match points average of 2.2, but on the road they score only 1.00 goal on average and have as many as 38% of away matches without scoring. Mafra’s superiority in shots (10.31 vs 7.77) and shots on target (4.38 vs 2.77) and a lower percentage of matches without a goal (8% vs 38%) suggest the hosts create more high-quality chances and convert them more often (shot conversion 15% vs 13%). On the other hand Amarante’s away xG against (1.47) exceeds their own xG (1.02), which means the visitors allow better chances than their current conceded-goal figure of 0.92 indicates; this is a risk factor for the away side. Considering Mafra’s superior home efficiency and the present metrics, I forecast a home win and assess their probability at about 55%.
View the statistical overviewBTTS - will both teams score?
Indicators from the last 5 matches strongly support BTTS: Mafra has 60% BTTS in the last 5 matches, while Amarante has as much as 80%, indicating both teams regularly score and concede in the short term. Seasonal indicators are more balanced — season BTTS is 50% for Mafra and 38% for Amarante, and the league BTTS level is 48%, whereas as many as 63% of league matches end in a clean sheet for one of the teams, which limits overall BTTS potential. From a chance-creation standpoint both sides generate similar xG: in the last 5 matches Mafra has xG 1.25 versus 1.11 for Amarante, and xG against is 1.31 versus 1.17; additionally average shots on target are 3.0 for Mafra and 2.77 for Amarante, indicating a realistic chance for both teams to score. The counterargument is defense — Mafra concedes an average of 1.8 goals in the last 5 matches, while Amarante only 0.8, suggesting Amarante is more likely to keep a clean sheet, although Amarante scores an average of 1.4 goals per game. Considering the strong form signal (60% vs 80%), similar xG and greater susceptibility of Mafra to conceding, I forecast BTTS - Yes at 62% and No at 38%.
View BTTS statisticsOver/Under - goals analysis
Based on xG and defensive data, I project Mafra to score about 1.28 goals (home xG 1.09 vs xG conceded to Amarante 1.47) and Amarante about 1.06 goals (xG 1.02 vs xG conceded to Mafra 1.09), for a total of approximately 2.34 expected goals. A Poisson model with λ=2.34 yields probabilities: Over 1.5 ≈68%, Over 2.5 ≈41% and Over 3.5 ≈21%, so the strongest signal is for no more than 3.5 goals. Seasonal metrics confirm a moderate low-scoring tendency: Over 2.5 occurs in 36% of Mafra’s matches and 38% of Amarante’s (league average 39%), while Over 3.5 occurs in only 21% and 8% respectively. Additionally, Mafra averages 8.29 shots per match (3.0 on target, conversion 16%) and Amarante 7.77 shots (2.77 on target, conversion 13%), which supports moderate xG and limits the chance of 4+ goals. Therefore I recommend an Under 3.5 bet as the strongest selection (probability ≈79%), with Under 2.5 moderately favored (~59%), and Over 1.5 remaining likely (~68%) for those who prefer a lower line.
View Over/Under statisticsHT/FT - half-time and full-time scenario
I forecast a draw at half-time and a CD Mafra win at full-time (X/1). Mafra were level at the break in 57% of matches and led at half-time in only 14%, so the HT is most likely to be a draw. After the interval the home side clearly dominate: they average 0.93 goals in the second half and ‘win’ the second half in 64% of matches, while Amarante average 0.62 goals and only 23% such performances, which increases the likelihood of a home victory after the change of ends. Additionally, Mafra earn an average of 2.21 points in the second half versus 1.23 for the visitors, and over the whole season the hosts average 2.0 points per match compared to 1.62 for Amarante, reinforcing the scenario of a turnaround from a half-time draw in Mafra’s favour. The low first-half goals averages (Mafra 0.36, Amarante 0.38) suggest we will first see a draw and then the hosts decide the outcome after the break.
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
| CD Mafra | Amarante | |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (shots on target) | 42% | 36% |
| Chance quality (xG per shot) | 0.14 | 0.13 |
| Finishing (goals per shot on target) | 0.33 | 0.40 |
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.
Amarante is 83% better for: last-5 form.
1.2 pts / match - CD Mafra · 2.2 pts / match - Amarante
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.
CD Mafra is 19% better for: goals scored per match.
1.37 goals / match - CD Mafra · 1.15 goals / match - Amarante
Amarante is 37% better for: goals conceded per match.
1.22 goals / match - CD Mafra · 0.89 goals / match - Amarante
CD Mafra scores in 85% of matches (23 of 27 matches), while Amarante keeps a clean sheet in 41% (11 of 27 matches).
Amarante scores in 74% of matches (20 of 27 matches), while CD Mafra keeps a clean sheet in 30% (8 of 27 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 - CD Mafra
Over / Under - Amarante
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.
CD Mafra is 16% better for: first-half form (half-time points).
1.33 pts / match - CD Mafra · 1.15 pts / match - Amarante
Before half-time (1st half)
After half-time (2nd half)
CD Mafra - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 33% of matches and wins 44%. Also wins matches without a half-time lead.
Defence stays stable across the full match.
Amarante - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 22% of matches and wins 52%. Also wins matches without a half-time lead.
Defence stays stable across the full match.
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 1.20 | 0.60 |
| Goals scored / match | 0.8 | 0.4 |
| Goals conceded / match | 1.0 | 0.8 |
| Average goals in match | 1.8 | 1.2 |
| 1 goal | 100% | 80% |
| 2 goals | 40% | 40% |
| 3 goals | 20% | 0% |
| Clean sheet | 40% | 20% |
| No goal | 40% | 60% |
| Goal difference | -1 | -2 |
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 1.00 | 1.80 |
| Goals scored / match | 0.4 | 1.0 |
| Goals conceded / match | 0.6 | 0.2 |
| Average goals in match | 1.0 | 1.2 |
| 1 goal | 80% | 60% |
| 2 goals | 20% | 60% |
| 3 goals | 0% | 0% |
| Clean sheet | 40% | 80% |
| No goal | 60% | 40% |
| Goal difference | -1 | +4 |
* 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 76-90 (9 goals). Concedes most in 31-45 (8). Late-goal balance (76-90): +3 - wins late phases.
Most dangerous in minutes 76-90 (10 goals). Concedes most in 31-45 (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
CD Mafra
Amarante
* 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 (Liga 3).
Teams vs league
| CD Mafra | Liga | Amarante | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average goals in match | ▲ 2.59 | 2.20 | ▼ 2.04 |
| Both teams scored | ▲ 63% | 48% | ▼ 44% |
| Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) | ▲ 44% | 38% | • 37% |
| Clean sheets | ▼ 30% | 32% | ▲ 41% |
| Goal before half-time | ▲ 70% | 66% | ▼ 63% |
| Goal after half-time | ▲ 78% | 72% | ▼ 70% |
^ 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
Substitutes
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.
Referee context
See how often this referee shows cards, awards penalties and how their matches tend to finish.
Head-to-head
Previous meeting: CD Mafra 0 - 0 - 1 Amarante. Average goals 1.00, both teams scored in 0% matches.
FAQ
What was the result of CD Mafra vs Amarante?
The Liga 3 match finished CD Mafra 1:4 Amarante. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.
What do the goal statistics show before CD Mafra vs Amarante?
CD Mafra score 1.37 goals per game on average and Amarante 1.15. The Liga 3 average is 2.20 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 38% of games. Both teams score in 63% of CD Mafra's matches and 44% of Amarante's.
What form are CD Mafra and Amarante in?
Over the last 5 games CD Mafra have a 2-0-3 record (1.20 points per game) and Amarante 3-2-0 (2.20 points per game).
Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for CD Mafra vs Amarante?
This page shows the full statistical context — form, head-to-head, goals, BTTS and Over/Under. The tip, value assessment and full reasoning are in the NoFluffPicks app.


