Abstract
<title>Abstract</title> <p>Football performance analysis has traditionally focused on identifying the match-performance indicators associated with success, whereas comparatively little attention has been devoted to how competitive performance should be represented analytically. This study examined whether competitive success in professional football is more informatively characterised by absolute match-performance indicators, team–opponent differences or a combination of both representations. Match-performance data were obtained from all 2,058 matches played during the 2023–2024 season across six European professional domestic leagues, comprising 4,116 team-match observations. Absolute indicators, relative indicators and combined representations were compared using descriptive analyses, one-way analyses of variance and multivariable logistic regression models. Relative indicators consistently discriminated wins, draws and losses more effectively than absolute indicators, particularly for shots on target, offensive efficiency and shot accuracy. In-sample logistic regression performance was substantially higher for the relative than for the absolute representation (AUC = 0.96 vs. 0.87; accuracy = 90.9% vs. 78.8%), whereas integrating both representations produced the strongest overall results (AUC = 0.97; accuracy = 93.3%), although the additional improvement was modest. In the final multivariable model, relative shots on target, relative offensive efficiency and absolute offensive efficiency remained independently associated with victory. These findings indicate that the analytical representation of football performance is a fundamental methodological consideration when investigating competitive success. Representing performance through team–opponent differences provides a more informative analytical framework than analysing isolated team statistics, while integrating absolute and relative indicators offers a modest but complementary improvement for explaining and modelling match success.</p>