Chicago Fire
Major League Soccer · 2026Chicago Fire 1–2 DC United · Major League Soccer
This page describes the completed match context. The result is not presented as a prior forecast.
Match at a glance
DC United won 1–2.
- Shots
- 15–13
- Shots on target
- 2–4
- Expected goals
- 1.91–1.59
- Possession
- 66%–34%
Full time
What the match recorded
DC United beat Chicago Fire 2–1. Recorded in this match (Chicago Fire – DC United): shots 15–13, shots on target 2–4, expected goals 1.91–1.59, possession 66%–34%. This is what was recorded. It is not a claim that the result was foreseeable.
Pre-match record
What the data showed before kick-off. Kept for reference; it did not know the result.
Both teams have elevated fouls records
weakEach team's season fouls average is above the competition baseline.
Evidence and caveat
Comparison: Both team averages are compared with the same competition baseline.
Window: season
| Metric | Chicago Fire | DC United | Baseline |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fouls | 13.5 fouls/match | 15.8 fouls/match | 11.8 fouls/match |
Caveat: A shared historical pattern is descriptive and may not repeat in one fixture.
DC United show a distinct attacking-volume record
weakDC United's shot volume and the opposing shot-allowance context sit below their competition baselines.
Evidence and caveat
Comparison: Team shot volume is paired with the opponent's recorded shot allowance.
Window: season
| Metric | Chicago Fire | DC United | Baseline |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shots | 11.3 shots/match | 10.5 shots/match | 12 shots/match |
| Shots against | 10 shots/match | 13.3 shots/match | 12 shots/match |
Caveat: Shot volume describes activity; it does not establish finishing quality or a match outcome.
The teams have contrasting possession records
weakChicago Fire have recorded the higher season possession share.
Evidence and caveat
Comparison: The recorded possession gap is 13.2 percentage points.
Window: season
| Metric | Chicago Fire | DC United | Baseline |
|---|---|---|---|
| Possession | 54.3% | 41% | 50.8% |
Caveat: Possession share does not show where possession occurred or how chances were created.
This match
Match statistics
History
Head-to-head
Recent meetings between these teams.
Last 5 meetings
Metric comparison
Team comparison
Season averages, with the sample size beside each metric.
Season: Chicago Fire favored in 0 of 9 directional metrics · DC United in 0 · 9 too close
Window
Season
Window
Last 10
Window
Last 5
Competition percentiles describe recorded style; they do not rank likely outcomes.
Possession control
Relative share of recorded possession within the competition.
Attacking volume
Recorded shot and scoring volume, expressed as competition percentiles.
Defensive resistance
Lower recorded scoring and shot allowance produces a higher descriptive percentile.
Directness proxy
Shots per possession point; a descriptive transition/directness proxy, not an outcome score.
Physicality
Recorded fouls and cards relative to competition peers.
Set-piece relevance
Corner volume relative to competition peers.
Tempo and pressure proxy
Combined event-volume percentiles for shots, corners and fouls.
Chicago Fire / DC United
Evidence quality
How much supports this analysis
- At least one team has fewer than the configured season sample.
- At least one team has an incomplete last-five window.
- Recorded xG is incomplete, so xG context is omitted where unavailable.
Known unknowns
- Lineups, injuries, suspensions and tactical changes are not available in the retained dataset.
- Some metrics are unavailable or below their observation minimum: xg_for, xg_against.
- The completed-match sample is too small for broad style conclusions.
More football
Related matches
Philadelphia Union
FC Dallas
San Diego FC
Houston Dynamo
Portland Timbers
Charlotte FC
Inter Miami CFTeam rankings in Major League Soccer
Make a graphic from this match
Creator Studio builds a branded post from this match's recorded data, with its evidence grade and source cutoff carried into the export.