KTP vs EIF: match statistics
KTP vs EIF: form, goals and key statistics
Key match information
KTP play EIF in Ykkösliiga (Finland). The match date is 12 June 2026 at 17:30. Venue: Arto Tolsa Areena. Final score: 5:1.
Current form
KTP: 3-1-1, 2.00 points/match. EIF: 0-1-4, 0.20 points/match.
Goal statistics
KTP scores 1.67 and concedes 1.00 goals per match. EIF scores 1.40 and concedes 2.00. League average: 2.47 goals.
BTTS / Over / Under
BTTS: KTP 40%, EIF 53%. Over 2.5: KTP 40%, EIF 67%. League level: BTTS 44%, Over 2.5 44%.
xG, shots and style
KTP has higher xG: 1.77 vs 1.35. KTP: 15.3 shots per match, EIF: 10.2.
Match halves
KTP: half-time lead 27%, second-half goals 1.07. EIF: half-time lead 20%, second-half goals 0.87.
Goals by minute
KTP: 61-75 (8 goals). EIF: 76-90+ (8 goals). This is historical distribution, not a predicted goal minute.
League context
Ykkösliiga: 2.47 goals per match, BTTS 44%, Over 2.5 44%.
Head-to-head
1 H2H matches: 0-0-1. Average goals 7.00, BTTS 100%.
Match description
KTP is the clear favorite to win: at home they have a 75% win rate and 50% clean sheets with an average of 1.92 xG per match, while EIF away have 0% wins, 100% losses and concede on average 3.00 goals away. The hosts create a lot of chances (16.25 shots and 5.25 on target per match) but score only 1.00 goal at home on average with a low conversion of ~6%, which suggests finishing could improve relative to xG. The visitors have 18 goals this season and score 1.25 away per match with a 13% conversion, yet in 50% of away matches they failed to hit the target, and their away goal difference is -7. In the last 5 fixtures KTP won 4 of 5 (2.4 pts per match), while EIF have 3 wins and 2 losses in that period (1.8 pts per match); combined with the visitors' weak defensive away form this favors a home victory.
Half-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
| KTP | EIF | |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (shots on target) | 33% | 39% |
| Chance quality (xG per shot) | 0.12 | 0.13 |
| Finishing (goals per shot on target) | 0.33 | 0.36 |
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.
KTP is 900% better for: last-5 form.
2 pts / match - KTP · 0.2 pts / match - EIF
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.
KTP is 19% better for: goals scored per match.
1.67 goals / match - KTP · 1.4 goals / match - EIF
KTP is 100% better for: goals conceded per match.
1 goals / match - KTP · 2 goals / match - EIF
KTP scores in 80% of matches (12 of 15 matches), while EIF keeps a clean sheet in 20% (3 of 15 matches).
EIF scores in 73% of matches (11 of 15 matches), while KTP keeps a clean sheet in 47% (7 of 15 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 — KTP
Over / Under — EIF
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.
KTP is 33% better for: first-half form (half-time points).
1.33 pts / match - KTP · 1 pts / match - EIF
Before half-time (1st half)
After half-time (2nd half)
KTP - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 27% of matches and wins 67%. Also wins matches without a half-time lead.
Defence stays stable across the full match.
EIF - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 20% of matches and wins 33%. Also wins matches without a half-time lead.
Concedes 0.5 more goals per match after half-time - defensive level drops in the second half.
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 1.60 | 2.00 |
| Goals scored / match | 1.0 | 1.8 |
| Goals conceded / match | 0.8 | 0.4 |
| Average goals in match | 1.8 | 2.2 |
| 1 goal | 80% | 100% |
| 2 goals | 40% | 60% |
| 3 goals | 40% | 40% |
| Clean sheet | 40% | 60% |
| No goal | 40% | 20% |
| Goal difference | +1 | +7 |
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 0.60 | 0.60 |
| Goals scored / match | 0.2 | 0.4 |
| Goals conceded / match | 0.6 | 2.0 |
| Average goals in match | 0.8 | 2.4 |
| 1 goal | 40% | 100% |
| 2 goals | 20% | 60% |
| 3 goals | 20% | 60% |
| Clean sheet | 60% | 20% |
| No goal | 80% | 60% |
| Goal difference | -2 | -8 |
* 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 61-75 (8 goli). Concedes most in 31-45 (4). Late-goal balance (76-90): +2 - wins late phases.
Most dangerous in minutes 76-90 (8 goli). Concedes most in 46-60 (7). 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 based on completed matches from the current season.
Match profile
KTP
EIF
* 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 (Ykkösliiga).
Teams vs league
| KTP | Liga | EIF | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average goals in match | ▲ 2.67 | 2.47 | ▲ 3.40 |
| Both teams scored | ▼ 40% | 44% | ▲ 53% |
| Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) | ▼ 40% | 44% | ▲ 67% |
| Clean sheets | ▲ 47% | 31% | ▼ 20% |
| Goal before half-time | • 60% | 60% | • 60% |
| Goal after half-time | ▲ 80% | 73% | ▲ 93% |
^ green = above league average, ˇ red = below league average. This shows direction of the gap, not a team rating.
Head-to-head
Previous meeting: KTP 0 - 0 - 1 EIF. Average goals 7.00, both teams scored in 100% matches.
FAQ
What was the result of KTP vs EIF?
The Ykkösliiga match finished KTP 5:1 EIF. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.
What do the goal statistics show before KTP vs EIF?
KTP score 1.67 goals per game on average and EIF 1.40. The Ykkösliiga average is 2.47 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 44% of games. Both teams score in 40% of KTP's matches and 53% of EIF's.
What form are KTP and EIF in?
Over the last 5 games KTP have a 3-1-1 record (2.00 points per game) and EIF 0-1-4 (0.20 points per game).
Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for KTP vs EIF?
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.