PitchMath
Major League Soccer · 2026
3–2Full-time analysis

This page describes the completed match context. The result is not presented as a prior forecast.

Match at a glance

Inter Miami CF won 3–2.

Shots
1415
Shots on target
74
Expected goals
2.111.9
Possession
53%47%

This match

Match statistics

  • Shots14 shots15 shotsInter Miami CF 14 shots, Chicago Fire 15 shots
  • Shots on target7 shots4 shotsInter Miami CF 7 shots, Chicago Fire 4 shots
  • Expected goals2.11 xG1.9 xGInter Miami CF 2.11 xG, Chicago Fire 1.9 xG
  • Possession53%47%Inter Miami CF 53%, Chicago Fire 47%
  • Corners8 corners4 cornersInter Miami CF 8 corners, Chicago Fire 4 corners
  • Fouls8 fouls16 foulsInter Miami CF 8 fouls, Chicago Fire 16 fouls

Full time

What the match recorded

Inter Miami beat Chicago Fire 3–2. Recorded in this match (Inter Miami – Chicago Fire): shots 14–15, shots on target 7–4, expected goals 2.11–1.9, possession 53%–47%. 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.

Inter Miami's recent record differs from the season

moderate

Inter Miami's last-five goals scored average is above their season average.

4 goals/match ▲Goals forLast 5 · Season2.63 goals/match
Evidence and caveat

Comparison: An unweighted last-five average is compared with the unweighted season average.

Window: last_5 versus season

MetricLast 5SeasonBaseline
Goals for4 goals/match2.63 goals/match1.63 goals/match

Caveat: Five matches are sensitive to opponent mix and isolated match states.

Inter Miami have a visible home split

moderate

Inter Miami's home-only shot average is above their full-season average.

19.7 shots/match ▲ShotsHome only · Season16.1 shots/match
Evidence and caveat

Comparison: Venue-only shot volume is compared with the same team's season record.

Window: home

MetricHome onlySeasonBaseline
Shots19.7 shots/match16.1 shots/match13 shots/match

Caveat: Venue splits can reflect opponent mix and should be read with the listed sample.

History

Head-to-head

Recent meetings between these teams.

Last 5 meetings

2Inter Miami CF
1Draws
2Chicago Fire
Inter Miami CF — Chicago Fire · Major League Soccer3–5
Chicago Fire — Inter Miami CF · Major League Soccer0–0
Chicago Fire — Inter Miami CF · Major League Soccer1–4
Inter Miami CF — Chicago Fire · Major League Soccer2–1
Chicago Fire — Inter Miami CF · Major League Soccer4–1

Head-to-Head & Recent Meetings

Metric comparison

Team comparison

Season averages, with the sample size beside each metric.

Where the edge is

Season: Inter Miami CF favored in 5 of 11 directional metrics · Chicago Fire in 6

led this metric higher value (descriptive) too close

Window

Season

Inter Miami CF16 matchesChicago Fire15 matches
2.63 goals/match ▲Goals scored16/151.93 goals/match
1.88 goals/matchGoals allowed16/15▲ 1.27 goals/match
2.38 xG/match ▲Expected goals13/122.01 xG/match
16.1 shots/match ▲Shots16/1514.8 shots/match
6.88 shots/match ▲Shots on target16/155.13 shots/match
57.4% ●Possession16/1552.7%
6 corners/match ●Corners16/154.53 corners/match
3 cards/matchCards4/42.25 cards/match
12.8 fouls/matchFouls16/1513 fouls/match

Style profile

Style profile

Competition percentiles describe recorded style; they do not rank likely outcomes.

Possession control

Relative share of recorded possession within the competition.

Inter Miami CF91.7
Chicago Fire70.0
0–100 competition percentile · coverage 100%

Attacking volume

Recorded shot and scoring volume, expressed as competition percentiles.

Inter Miami CF97.2
Chicago Fire79.4
0–100 competition percentile · coverage 100%

Defensive resistance

Lower recorded scoring and shot allowance produces a higher descriptive percentile.

Inter Miami CF33.9
Chicago Fire63.9
0–100 competition percentile · coverage 100%

Directness proxy

Shots per possession point; a descriptive transition/directness proxy, not an outcome score.

Inter Miami CF71.7
Chicago Fire68.3
0–100 competition percentile · coverage 100%

Physicality

Recorded fouls and cards relative to competition peers.

Inter Miami CF75.0
Chicago Fire55.0
0–100 competition percentile · coverage 63%

Set-piece relevance

Corner volume relative to competition peers.

Inter Miami CF91.7
Chicago Fire35.0
0–100 competition percentile · coverage 100%

Tempo and pressure proxy

Combined event-volume percentiles for shots, corners and fouls.

Inter Miami CF88.3
Chicago Fire66.7
0–100 competition percentile · coverage 100%

Schedule context

Rest and recent workload

  • Matches in previous 14 days · Both teams: 0 matches
59 daysRest before fixtureprevious completed fixtures · 1/160 days

Inter Miami CF / Chicago Fire

Evidence quality

How much supports this analysis

Grade A · Strong evidenceStrong evidence — ready
Season samples16 / 15home / away teams
Recent samples5 / 5last-five windows
FreshnessLess than one dayfrom nearest prior match
  • Recent samples and important metric coverage meet the strong evidence threshold.

Known unknowns

  • Lineups, injuries, suspensions and tactical changes are not available in the retained dataset.
Analysis cutoff: Thu, 23 Jul 2026, 03:30 UTC · analysis-v4

Team rankings in Major League Soccer

Goals per match rankingxG per match rankingShots per match ranking
TeamsInter Miami CFChicago Fire
CompetitionMajor League Soccer
Head-to-headInter Miami CF — Chicago Fire
MethodHow PitchMath calculates this

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.

Turn this match into a graphicReady-made from PitchMath data · No sign-up required