Montpellier vs Clermont: match statistics
Montpellier vs Clermont: form, goals and key statistics
Key match information
Montpellier played Clermont in Ligue 2 (France). The match was played on 2 May 2026. Final score: 1:2.
Current form
Montpellier: 2-3-0, 1.80 points/match. Clermont: 0-3-2, 0.60 points/match.
Goal statistics
Montpellier scores 1.22 and concedes 0.88 goals per match. Clermont scores 1.09 and concedes 1.34. League average: 2.50 goals.
BTTS / Over / Under
BTTS: Montpellier 38%, Clermont 59%. Over 2.5: Montpellier 28%, Clermont 47%. League level: BTTS 51%, Over 2.5 47%.
xG, shots and style
Montpellier has higher xG: 1.28 vs 1.15. Montpellier: 11.4 shots per match, Clermont: 10.5.
Match halves
Montpellier: half-time lead 25%, second-half goals 0.75. Clermont: half-time lead 19%, second-half goals 0.69.
Goals by minute
Montpellier: 76-90+ (13 goals). Clermont: 46-60 (9 goals). This is historical distribution, not a predicted goal minute.
League context
Ligue 2: 2.50 goals per match, BTTS 51%, Over 2.5 47%.
Head-to-head
Before this fixture, 1 previous H2H matches were available: 0-1-0. Average goals 2.00, 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
Montpellier are the favorites on paper: at home they average 1.63 goals per match with an average xG of 1.45, while Clermont score 1.06 goals on the road with xG 1.02. Defensively the hosts look better — Montpellier concede 1.13 goals at home and only 3 goals in the last 5 matches, whereas Clermont concede 1.56 goals away and have conceded 7 in their last 5 fixtures. Differences in chance creation are clear: Montpellier register 4.69 on-target shots and 13.13 shots per home match versus Clermont’s 2.81 on target and 9.75 away, and the percentage of matches without scoring is 19% compared to 31% in Montpellier’s favor. Form confirms this advantage — Montpellier in the last 5 matches have 2 wins and 3 draws (1.8 pts per match), while Clermont are winless in that period (0 wins, 3 draws, 2 losses, 0.6 pts per match). Considering the season goal differential (39 scored and 28 conceded for Montpellier versus 35 scored and 43 conceded for Clermont) and superior xG and shooting metrics, I assess the probabilities as: 65% Montpellier win, 20% draw, 15% Clermont win.
View the statistical overviewBTTS - will both teams score?
Montpellier scores on average 1.13 goals per game with xG 1.29, while Clermont records 1.06 goals and xG 1.02; at the same time Clermont concedes 1.56 goals per game (43 conceded this season) versus 1.13 conceded by Montpellier. The hosts create more chances: 11.31 shots and 3.75 on target per game vs 9.75 and 2.81 for Clermont, which increases the probability of a Montpellier goal. Seasonal BTTS rate is 69% for Montpellier and 50% for Clermont, with the league average at 51%; in the last 5 matches BTTS was 40% for Montpellier and 60% for Clermont, so signals are mixed but lean towards both teams scoring. Montpellier has only 6% clean sheets this season (vs 25% for Clermont away), and Clermont has a high goals conceded average 1.56, so I expect both teams to find the net. Therefore I give BTTS - Yes 65% vs 35% No, because Montpellier's high seasonal BTTS (69%), the hosts' greater offensive volume and Clermont's weak defense (43 goals conceded) provide the strongest signal for BTTS.
View BTTS statisticsOver/Under - goals analysis
I estimate total expected goals at about 2.56: home ~1.43 (home xG average 1.29 and Clermont’s average conceded 1.56 give (1.29+1.56)/2≈1.43), away ~1.13 (Clermont xG average 1.02 and Montpellier conceded 1.28 give ≈1.15, adjusted to 1.13 due to the last 5 matches where Montpellier conceded on average 0.6 goals). Shot statistics support these values — Montpellier averages 11.31 shots with 3.75 on target (conversion 10%), Clermont 9.75 shots with 2.81 on target (conversion 11%), translating to roughly 1.1–1.3 xG per team. Seasonal indicators show a strong likelihood of at least two goals: Over 1.5 occurred in 69% of Montpellier’s matches and 56% of Clermont’s, both teams have 94% of matches over 0.5 goals, and BTTS appeared in 69%/50% of matches (home/away). At the 2.5 line the signal is balanced — season Over 2.5 is 44% for homes and 50% for aways (avg ~47%), and with λ=2.56 the Poisson distribution gives ~47% chance for Over 2.5. Therefore the strongest and most reliable signal is Over 1.5 (estimated ~72% probability), so I recommend backing Over at 1.5; the 3.5 line has low chances for Over (~26%).
View Over/Under statisticsHT/FT - half-time and full-time scenario
Montpellier has the edge in recent results and first halves: in 3 of their last 5 matches the hosts held a lead at the break (60%), and over the last 5 games they average 0.8 goals by Half-Time versus 0.4 for Clermont. The home side generate higher xG (1.29 vs 1.02) and register more shots on target per match (3.75 vs 2.81), while Clermont concedes an average of 1.56 goals per game with xG against of 1.56, indicating a weaker away defence. Over the season 63% of Montpellier’s matches were kept as a clean sheet at Half-Time, but the recent run shows increased attacking activity from the hosts, and the visitors have 0% wins in their last 5 matches. Considering these figures and the visitors’ lower away points return (0.81), the most confident scenario is Montpellier leading at Half-Time and maintaining the lead to Full-Time (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
| Montpellier | Clermont | |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (shots on target) | 34% | 31% |
| Chance quality (xG per shot) | 0.11 | 0.11 |
| Finishing (goals per shot on target) | 0.31 | 0.33 |
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.
Montpellier is 200% better for: last-5 form.
1.8 pts / match - Montpellier · 0.6 pts / match - Clermont
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.
Montpellier is 12% better for: goals scored per match.
1.22 goals / match - Montpellier · 1.09 goals / match - Clermont
Montpellier is 52% better for: goals conceded per match.
0.88 goals / match - Montpellier · 1.34 goals / match - Clermont
Montpellier scores in 66% of matches (21 of 32 matches), while Clermont keeps a clean sheet in 16% (5 of 32 matches).
Clermont scores in 69% of matches (22 of 32 matches), while Montpellier keeps a clean sheet in 38% (12 of 32 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 - Montpellier
Over / Under - Clermont
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.
Montpellier is 18% better for: first-half form (half-time points).
1.25 pts / match - Montpellier · 1.06 pts / match - Clermont
Before half-time (1st half)
After half-time (2nd half)
Montpellier - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 25% of matches and wins 44%. Also wins matches without a half-time lead.
Defence stays stable across the full match.
Clermont - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 19% of matches and wins 22%. Also wins matches without a half-time lead.
Defence stays stable across the full match.
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 2.20 | 1.20 |
| Goals scored / match | 0.8 | 0.4 |
| Goals conceded / match | 0.2 | 0.4 |
| Average goals in match | 1.0 | 0.8 |
| 1 goal | 60% | 60% |
| 2 goals | 20% | 20% |
| 3 goals | 20% | 0% |
| Clean sheet | 80% | 60% |
| No goal | 40% | 60% |
| Goal difference | +3 | 0 |
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 1.00 | 1.20 |
| Goals scored / match | 0.4 | 0.6 |
| Goals conceded / match | 0.6 | 0.8 |
| Average goals in match | 1.0 | 1.4 |
| 1 goal | 60% | 100% |
| 2 goals | 20% | 20% |
| 3 goals | 20% | 20% |
| Clean sheet | 60% | 20% |
| 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 76-90 (13 goals). Concedes most in 0-15 (7). Late-goal balance (76-90): +6 - wins late phases.
Most dangerous in minutes 46-60 (9 goals). Concedes most in 76-90 (11). Late-goal balance (76-90): -4 - late phases are a weakness.
* 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
Montpellier
Clermont
* 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 (Ligue 2).
Teams vs league
| Montpellier | Liga | Clermont | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average goals in match | ▼ 2.09 | 2.50 | • 2.44 |
| Both teams scored | ▼ 38% | 51% | ▲ 59% |
| Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) | ▼ 28% | 47% | • 47% |
| Clean sheets | ▲ 38% | 30% | ▼ 16% |
| Goal before half-time | ▼ 63% | 66% | ▼ 56% |
| Goal after half-time | ▼ 66% | 72% | ▲ 81% |
^ 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.
Referee context
See how often this referee shows cards, awards penalties and how their matches tend to finish.
Head-to-head
Previous meeting: Montpellier 0 - 1 - 0 Clermont. Average goals 2.00, both teams scored in 100% matches.
FAQ
What was the result of Montpellier vs Clermont?
The Ligue 2 match finished Montpellier 1:2 Clermont. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.
What do the goal statistics show before Montpellier vs Clermont?
Montpellier score 1.22 goals per game on average and Clermont 1.09. The Ligue 2 average is 2.50 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 47% of games. Both teams score in 38% of Montpellier's matches and 59% of Clermont's.
What form are Montpellier and Clermont in?
Over the last 5 games Montpellier have a 2-3-0 record (1.80 points per game) and Clermont 0-3-2 (0.60 points per game).
Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for Montpellier vs Clermont?
The statistical background for Montpellier vs Clermont — 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.


