Back to Home

GRASSHOPPERS vs VADUZ

2026-10-31 · KO 17:00 · Dataset generated 2026-10-30T06:01:55.647Z · Page generated 2026-11-04

Recent Form

Statistics (Last 10 Matches)

GRASSHOPPERS

W
3
D
2
L
5
Scored
1.7
Conceded
2.2

VADUZ

W
3
D
1
L
6
Scored
2.2
Conceded
2.0

League Table

GRASSHOPPERS

Super League

Position
11th
Played
11
Points
9
W-D-L
2-3-6
Goal difference
-13

VADUZ

Super League

Position
10th
Played
11
Points
9
W-D-L
3-0-8
Goal difference
-1

Head to Head

FC Vaduz5 - 2Grasshopper
FC Vaduz2 - 3Grasshopper
Grasshopper1 - 2FC Vaduz
Grasshopper3 - 3FC Vaduz
FC Vaduz2 - 2Grasshopper

Match Summary

Recent form gives GRASSHOPPERS the edge: 2 wins and 2 losses in the last 5, compared with 1 win and 3 losses for VADUZ. Over the available recent sample, GRASSHOPPERS average 1.7 goals scored and 2.2 conceded per match; VADUZ average 2.2 scored and 2.0 conceded. VADUZ have scored more, while the defensive averages are close. In the listed head-to-head meetings, GRASSHOPPERS won 1, VADUZ won 2, with 2 draws. Both teams scored in all 5 meetings, which averaged 5.0 goals overall. League context: GRASSHOPPERS sit 11th and VADUZ 10th in Super League. VADUZ are higher in the table. That is useful season-long context, while the recent results above show the more immediate form. Outcome leans: 1X (GRASSHOPPERS or draw): form favors GRASSHOPPERS, but the goal rates make the outright win less secure. Over 2.5 lean (recent-rate baseline: 4.1 goals). BTTS yes lean: both teams have scored and conceded regularly in this sample.

What to Expect

Matchup outlook

  • GRASSHOPPERS arrive with the better recent results, taking 7 points from 5 compared with 4 for VADUZ. That is a form advantage, not by itself a reason to expect a comfortable win.
  • Using each side’s last-ten-match scoring and conceding averages, a cross-check against the opponent’s defense gives a descriptive baseline of about 1.9 for GRASSHOPPERS and 2.2 for VADUZ (4.1 combined). The rates point to a fairly balanced scoring setup. This is a comparison of past averages, not a score forecast.
  • Both attacks have averaged at least 1.3 goals per match, so neither arrives without recent scoring output. The defensive figures still matter: scoring averages alone are not enough to make a both-teams-to-score call.

Evidence and Caveats

What supports the read

  • GRASSHOPPERS have taken 3 more points across the listed form sequence (2-1-2 for GRASSHOPPERS; 1-1-3 for VADUZ). The gap is more informative than wins alone because it also accounts for draws.
  • VADUZ have the better last-ten goal balance (0.2 per match against -0.5 for GRASSHOPPERS), combining scoring and defensive output rather than looking at wins in isolation.
  • VADUZ have been the more productive attack in the last-ten sample (2.2 goals per match against 1.7 for GRASSHOPPERS).
  • GRASSHOPPERS (2.2 conceded per match) and VADUZ (2.0 conceded per match) have allowed at least 1.5 goals per match. That is a defensive weakness in the sample, though it does not show how those goals were created or whether the same pattern will carry into this fixture.

What challenges the read

  • The indicators do not line up neatly: GRASSHOPPERS lead on recent points, while VADUZ have the better scoring-minus-conceding balance. That split argues for a measured lean rather than treating either signal as decisive.

What could change it

  • Head-to-head results are useful context, but the list does not show when those matches were played; older meetings may say little about the current squads.
  • These are team-level averages, not a tactical or lineup report. They do not account for opponent strength, confirmed starters, injuries, venue conditions, or how each team performed home and away.

Players to Watch and Team News

No current player scoring data is available for this exact fixture and date. Injury and suspension status is not verified, so no absence claims are made.

18+ | T&Cs apply | Gamble responsibly | Includes affiliate commission disclosure

18+ Only

Predictions are for informational purposes only. Gambling involves financial risk and may lead to addiction. Please play responsibly.