WC 2026 · Forecasting Oxford Football Forecasting
🇩🇿

Algeria

CAF Group J
0.3% Champion probability ±0.02 MC-SE
Coach
Vladimir Petković foreign · Bosnian
Elo (model)
1,760 world 31st
Squad value
€282M
Power → Reality
24th 25th −0.03 pp · neutral draw

Fig. D1 Fixture-aware · 100k sims

Algeria — stage progression

Round of 32: 70.08% (95% MC 69.80%–70.36%; MC-SE ±0.14 pts) Round of 32 reach 70.1% ±0.14 Round of 16: 24.61% (95% MC 24.35%–24.88%; MC-SE ±0.14 pts) Round of 16 reach 24.6% ±0.14 Quarter-final: 9.78% (95% MC 9.59%–9.96%; MC-SE ±0.09 pts) Quarter-final reach 9.8% ±0.09 Semi-final: 3.36% (95% MC 3.25%–3.47%; MC-SE ±0.06 pts) Semi-final reach 3.4% ±0.06 Final: 1.10% (95% MC 1.04%–1.16%; MC-SE ±0.03 pts) Final reach 1.1% ±0.03 Champion: 0.29% (95% MC 0.26%–0.33%; MC-SE ±0.02 pts) Champion reach 0.3% ±0.02

On the central forecast, Algeria more likely than not reaches the Round of 32 (70%). Champion probability is 0.3% ± 0.02 pts.

Source · Oxford Football Forecasting model
Group J Confed Advance (top 2) Reach R32
1🇦🇷ArgentinaCONMEBOL69.3%98.3%
2🇦🇹AustriaUEFA28.6%76.7%
3🇩🇿AlgeriaCAF24.6%70.1%
4🇯🇴JordanAFC3.5%20.4%

Source · Oxford Football Forecasting model

Bracket position Half 1 · Quadrant 3

Earliest possible meetings

No collision rows recorded for this team.

Collision = the earliest round the bracket wiring could pit Algeria against that side. Full bracket & collision matrix →

Match 19 · 2026-06-17 · Kansas City Stadium away
Algeria Argentina
11.1% win 24.6% draw 64.3% loss
Most likely 0–1 (16.9%) λ 0.56–1.70 Over 2.5 39% · BTTS 36%
Match 44 · 2026-06-23 · San Francisco Bay Area Stadium away
Algeria Jordan
58.5% win 26.1% draw 15.4% loss
Most likely 1–0 (14.3%) λ 1.65–0.73 Over 2.5 43% · BTTS 43%
Match 69 · 2026-06-28 · Kansas City Stadium home
Algeria Austria
30.3% win 31.1% draw 38.6% loss
Most likely 1–1 (14.4%) λ 1.02–1.18 Over 2.5 38% · BTTS 45%
How a match forecast is built

Each pairing is scored by the ensemble (Dixon-Coles bivariate-Poisson, the Bayesian hierarchical model and the global LightGBM-Poisson, log-pooled), producing an 11×11 scoreline grid that is marginalised into win/draw/loss, expected goals (λ), over/under 2.5 and both-teams-to-score. These are the same distributions the tournament simulator consumes, oriented here to Algeria. Knockout fixtures are not shown — their occupants are still probabilistic, so there is no single pairing to forecast yet.

Fig. D2 Relative to the 48-team median

Algeria vs the field

Elo rating: 1760 vs field median 1780 (0.99× the field) Elo rating 1760 med 1780 Recent NT form: 2.40 ppg vs field median 1.87 ppg (1.29× the field) Recent NT form 2.40 ppg med 1.87 ppg Squad value: €282M vs field median €286M (0.99× the field) Squad value €282M med €286M Squad form (global): 0.287 vs field median 0.211 (1.36× the field) Squad form (global) 0.287 med 0.211 Fitness readiness: 0.756 vs field median 0.707 (1.07× the field) Fitness readiness 0.756 med 0.707 Familiarity / chemistry: 0.006 vs field median 0.015 (0.40× the field) Familiarity / chemistry 0.006 med 0.015 Experience (mean caps): 21 vs field median 25 (0.86× the field) Experience (mean caps) 21 med 25

Read each row as a multiple of the field median: dots to the right of the dashed line are above-field, to the left below. Raw values are labelled on the right so the comparison is transparent.

Source · Oxford Football Forecasting model

Fig. D3 Bayesian projection residual g

Algeria on the decoupling axis

aligned (0) ← record > squad price squad valued > record →

g = −0.20 ± 0.07: the record outruns the squad price — the team has achieved more than its comparatively modest squad value would predict.

Source · Oxford Football Forecasting model
What g means — and its limits

g is the residual from regressing a team’s current squad market value on its history-based strength in the Bayesian hierarchical model. Positive g means the squad is valued above what the team’s record predicts; negative means the record outruns the squad’s price (the side achieves more than its market value implies). Regressed on out-of-sample success the slope is positive — squad-rich sides go a touch further — but not statistically significant at n = 3 tournaments, so treat a single team’s g as a descriptive read, not a hard prediction. The full decoupling essay →

26players
26.1mean age
21mean caps
46%in a top-5 league
24distinct clubs
2largest club bloc
# Player Pos Club League Club min Gls Caps NT gls
1Melvin MastilGKStade Nyonnaisno club data10
2Aïssa MandiDFLilleLigue 1 +1.70z3,28911177
3Achref AbadaDFUSM Algerno club data71
4Mohamed Amine TougaiDFEspérance de TunisLigue 1 −0.28z7204292
5Zineddine BelaïdDFJS KabylieLigue 15401101
6Ramiz ZerroukiMFTwenteEredivisie +0.74z2,8463523
7Riyad Mahrez (captain)FWAl-AhliPro League −0.86z3,229811438
8Houssem AouarMFAl-IttihadPro League −0.86z3,08415206
9Amine GouiriFWMarseilleLigue 1 +1.70z1,70211228
10Farès ChaïbiMFEintracht FrankfurtBundesliga +1.84z2,5093293
11Anis Hadj MoussaFWFeyenoordEredivisie +0.74z3,44314141
12Nadhir BenboualiFWGyőri ETONB I1,240731
13Jaouen HadjamDFYoung BoysSuper League −0.07z2,1502173
14Hicham BoudaouiMFNiceLigue 1 +1.70z2,1701320
15Rayan Aït-NouriDFManchester CityPremier League +2.21z2,0220280
16Oussama BenbotGKUSM AlgerLigue 1924020
17Rafik BelghaliDFHellas VeronaSerie A +1.70z1,9262121
18Mohamed AmouraFWVfL WolfsburgBundesliga +1.84z2,06584519
19Nabil BentalebMFLilleLigue 1 +1.70z2,2902596
20Adil BoulbinaFWAl-DuhailStars League −2.20z1,2558116
21Ramy BensebainiDFBorussia DortmundBundesliga +1.84z3,3057817
22Ibrahim MazaMFBayer LeverkusenBundesliga +1.84z2,9885162
23Luca ZidaneGKGranadano club data70
24Yacine TitraouiMFCharleroiJupiler Pro League −0.07z2,904550
25Farès GhedjemisFWFrosinoneSerie B +1.70z3,0981511
26Samir CherguiDFParis FCLigue 1 +1.70z1,155140

Source · Official squad announcements · API-Football (global club coverage). 3 of 26 players have no club season matched in API-Football — shown as “— no club data”, not imputed. Form coverage for this squad: 88%.

Diaspora in the hosts

98,228

2.0 per 1,000 of home population

Host-language familiarity

Foreign

primary language Arabic

Climate adaptation gap

+1.2°C

home-vs-venue heat differential

Venue extremes

37°C

peak heat index · altitude up to 273 m

Travel

8h

max time-zone shift · nearest venue 6,207 km

Source · UN DESA international migrant stock · US Census Bureau · Open-Meteo & venue records

Fig. D4 eloratings.net method · year-end values

Algeria — Elo since 1963

1873 world #31
Algeria Qualified-field median

Algeria ends the series at 1873 Elo, the world’s 31st-ranked side — below the qualified-field median.

Source · eloratings.net
Which Elo is this?

This line is the public eloratings.net series (year-end ratings), which terminates exactly at the current rating and world rank shown on the marker. It is a different number from the Elo shown in the header band (a panel-normalised rating used inside the forecast); the two are ~0.99 correlated but on different scales. We keep them distinct rather than blend them.

88% Squad club-form coverage Share of this squad with a matched club season feeding the global form layer.
88% Fitness-readiness coverage Where below 100%, part of the fitness signal is imputed by the de-biasing layer.
n = 3 Out-of-sample tournaments The model is validated on three held-out World Cups; it matches the market, it does not beat it.

Validated on n=3 held-out tournaments; coverage below 1.0 means part of this squad's club-form/fitness is imputed (the global de-biasing layer). For Algeria, 3 of 26 players are shown as “— no club data”. Full validation, calibration & conformal coverage →