Toronto vs SJ Earthquakes: match statistics
Toronto vs SJ Earthquakes: form, goals and key statistics
Key match information
Toronto played SJ Earthquakes in MLS (United States). The match was played on 2 May 2026. Final score: 1:1.
Current form
Toronto: 1-3-1, 1.20 points/match. SJ Earthquakes: 5-0-0, 3.00 points/match.
Goal statistics
Toronto scores 1.70 and concedes 1.90 goals per match. SJ Earthquakes scores 2.50 and concedes 0.60. League average: 3.23 goals.
BTTS / Over / Under
BTTS: Toronto 80%, SJ Earthquakes 40%. Over 2.5: Toronto 70%, SJ Earthquakes 60%. League level: BTTS 58%, Over 2.5 63%.
xG, shots and style
SJ Earthquakes has higher xG: 1.73 vs 1.41. Toronto: 11.8 shots per match, SJ Earthquakes: 15.9.
Match halves
Toronto: half-time lead 10%, second-half goals 1.50. SJ Earthquakes: half-time lead 50%, second-half goals 1.60.
Goals by minute
Toronto: 76-90+ (7 goals). SJ Earthquakes: 46-60 (7 goals). This is historical distribution, not a predicted goal minute.
League context
MLS: 3.23 goals per match, BTTS 58%, Over 2.5 63%.
Head-to-head
No aligned head-to-head sample is available in the database.
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 expect an away win: SJ Earthquakes hold a 9-0-1 season record and a 5-game winning streak in which they scored 18 goals (3.6 per match). Defensively the visitors are clearly superior — San Jose concedes 0.8 goals on the road on average, while Toronto concedes 1.86 at home, and the visitors have 40% clean sheets away versus 0% for Toronto. Toronto generates more opportunities (12.86 shots and 5.43 on target per home match) but with lower conversion of 16% (approximately 2.06 goals from those attempts), whereas San Jose averages 9 shots with a 27% conversion rate (about 2.43 goals), making them more efficient in finishing. xG data supports the visitors' advantage: San Jose has xG for 1.06 and actually scores 2.4 goals (1.34 above xG) and xG against 1.58 with 0.8 conceded (0.78 below xG), while Toronto has xG for 1.52 and 2.0 goals (0.48 above xG) and xG against 1.23 with 1.86 conceded (0.63 above xG). Considering San Jose’s average of 3.0 points per match in the last 5 fixtures versus Toronto’s 1.2 points, plus superior efficiency and defense, I assess the probabilities as 65% for San Jose, 20% for a draw and 15% for Toronto.
View the statistical overviewBTTS - will both teams score?
Recent 5-match indicators strongly support BTTS - Yes: Toronto has 100% BTTS in the last 5 matches, averaging 2.2 scored and 2.2 conceded, while SJ Earthquakes has 80% BTTS in the last 5, averaging 3.6 scored and 1.2 conceded. Long-term seasonal stats are mixed — Toronto posts season BTTS only 20% and clean sheet expected in 60% of matches, whereas SJ records season BTTS 60% and concedes 0.8 goals per away match on average. In chance creation Toronto generates significantly more xG and shots: xG 2.4 vs 1.06 for SJ, 22.8 shots and 8.8 shots on target per match for Toronto vs 9.0 and 3.4 for SJ, giving Toronto a clear edge in chance volume. However, SJ is very efficient with fewer attempts — conversion rate 27% vs 11% for Toronto means that with 3.4 shots on target SJ has a real probability of scoring. Considering the 100%/80% BTTS in the last 5 matches, the xG advantage 2.4 vs 1.06 and the large shot-volume differential (22.8 vs 9.0), I favor the 'both teams to score' scenario at 75% vs 25% for the opposite outcome.
View BTTS statisticsOver/Under - goals analysis
The xG-based model projects 1.99 expected goals for Toronto, calculated as (2.4 + 1.58)/2, and 0.88 for San Jose, calculated as (1.06 + 0.7)/2; total = 2.87 goals. Season-long metrics support the over: Toronto has 80% of matches over 1.5, San Jose 60%, and both teams have 60% of matches over 2.5. Form from the last 5 matches is even more goal-heavy — Toronto averaged 2.2 goals (11 in 5 matches), San Jose 3.6 goals (18 in 5), combined 5.8 per game — which increases the probability of Over 2.5 goals. On the other hand, the expected total of 2.87 is clearly below 3.5, and Toronto has 60% clean sheets this season, so Over 3.5 looks unlikely. Therefore my strongest signal is Over 1.5 (line 1.5) at 82%; Over 2.5 is treated as moderately likely (68%), and Over 3.5 as unlikely (30%). This assessment is further supported by shot and quality metrics (Toronto 22.8 shots and 8.8 shots on target with xG 2.4, San Jose 9.0 shots, 3.4 on target and a conversion rate of 27%).
View Over/Under statisticsHT/FT - half-time and full-time scenario
Toronto led at the break in 3 of their last 5 matches (60%) and averages 1.2 goals by half-time versus San Jose’s 0.6, which increases the probability of the home side holding a lead at the break. Additionally, Toronto generates 2.4 xG versus San Jose’s 1.06 and averages 8.8 shots on target compared to 3.4, so the creative and goal threat edge is clearly with the hosts. Defensively Toronto concedes an average of 0.4 goals per match and practically does not concede after the break (second-half concession average 0.0 and 100% of second halves without conceding), which raises the chance of seeing the lead carried to full-time. However, San Jose has 5 wins in their last 5 matches (100% form) and scores frequently after the break—notably 5 goals in minutes 46–60—so there is a risk of a turnaround. Considering the clear xG advantage (2.4 vs 1.06), the shot volume and the fact the hosts lead at the break in 60% of games, the most likely scenario is Toronto leading at half-time and winning at full-time (HT/FT 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
| Toronto | SJ Earthquakes | |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (shots on target) | 42% | 38% |
| Chance quality (xG per shot) | 0.12 | 0.11 |
| Finishing (goals per shot on target) | 0.34 | 0.41 |
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.
SJ Earthquakes is 150% better for: last-5 form.
1.2 pts / match - Toronto · 3 pts / match - SJ Earthquakes
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.
SJ Earthquakes is 47% better for: goals scored per match.
1.7 goals / match - Toronto · 2.5 goals / match - SJ Earthquakes
SJ Earthquakes is 217% better for: goals conceded per match.
1.9 goals / match - Toronto · 0.6 goals / match - SJ Earthquakes
Toronto scores in 90% of matches (9 of 10 matches), while SJ Earthquakes keeps a clean sheet in 50% (5 of 10 matches).
SJ Earthquakes scores in 90% of matches (9 of 10 matches), while Toronto keeps a clean sheet in 10% (1 of 10 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 - Toronto
Over / Under - SJ Earthquakes
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.
SJ Earthquakes is 157% better for: first-half form (half-time points).
0.7 pts / match - Toronto · 1.8 pts / match - SJ Earthquakes
Before half-time (1st half)
After half-time (2nd half)
Toronto - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 10% of matches and wins 30%. Also wins matches without a half-time lead.
Concedes 0.3 more goals per match after half-time - defensive level drops in the second half.
SJ Earthquakes - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 50% of matches and wins 90%. Also wins matches without a half-time lead.
Defence stays stable across the full match.
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 0.60 | 2.00 |
| Goals scored / match | 0.0 | 2.2 |
| Goals conceded / match | 0.4 | 1.8 |
| Average goals in match | 0.4 | 4.0 |
| 1 goal | 40% | 100% |
| 2 goals | 0% | 100% |
| 3 goals | 0% | 80% |
| Clean sheet | 60% | 0% |
| No goal | 100% | 0% |
| Goal difference | -2 | +2 |
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 1.60 | 2.20 |
| Goals scored / match | 1.0 | 2.6 |
| Goals conceded / match | 0.4 | 0.6 |
| Average goals in match | 1.4 | 3.2 |
| 1 goal | 80% | 80% |
| 2 goals | 40% | 80% |
| 3 goals | 20% | 60% |
| Clean sheet | 60% | 60% |
| No goal | 40% | 20% |
| Goal difference | +3 | +10 |
* 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 (7 goals). Concedes most in 76-90 (5). Late-goal balance (76-90): +2 - wins late phases.
Most dangerous in minutes 46-60 (7 goals). Concedes most in 16-30 (2). Late-goal balance (76-90): +7 - 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
Toronto
SJ Earthquakes
* 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 (MLS).
Teams vs league
| Toronto | Liga | SJ Earthquakes | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average goals in match | ▲ 3.60 | 3.23 | ▼ 3.10 |
| Both teams scored | ▲ 80% | 58% | ▼ 40% |
| Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) | ▲ 70% | 63% | ▼ 60% |
| Clean sheets | ▼ 10% | 24% | ▲ 50% |
| Goal before half-time | ▼ 60% | 74% | ▲ 80% |
| Goal after half-time | ▲ 90% | 78% | ▼ 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
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.
FAQ
What was the result of Toronto vs SJ Earthquakes?
The MLS match finished Toronto 1:1 SJ Earthquakes. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.
What do the goal statistics show before Toronto vs SJ Earthquakes?
Toronto score 1.70 goals per game on average and SJ Earthquakes 2.50. The MLS average is 3.23 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 63% of games. Both teams score in 80% of Toronto's matches and 40% of SJ Earthquakes's.
What form are Toronto and SJ Earthquakes in?
Over the last 5 games Toronto have a 1-3-1 record (1.20 points per game) and SJ Earthquakes 5-0-0 (3.00 points per game).
Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for Toronto vs SJ Earthquakes?
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.