WC 2026 · Forecasting Oxford Football Forecasting
🇸🇪

Sweden

UEFA Group F
0.2% Champion probability ±0.01 MC-SE
Coach
Elo (model)
1,712 world 53rd
Squad value
€414M
Power → Reality
32nd 32nd −0.00 pp · neutral draw

Fig. D1 Fixture-aware · 100k sims

Sweden — stage progression

Round of 32: 60.16% (95% MC 59.86%–60.47%; MC-SE ±0.15 pts) Round of 32 reach 60.2% ±0.15 Round of 16: 17.76% (95% MC 17.52%–18.00%; MC-SE ±0.12 pts) Round of 16 reach 17.8% ±0.12 Quarter-final: 6.73% (95% MC 6.57%–6.88%; MC-SE ±0.08 pts) Quarter-final reach 6.7% ±0.08 Semi-final: 2.16% (95% MC 2.07%–2.25%; MC-SE ±0.05 pts) Semi-final reach 2.2% ±0.05 Final: 0.59% (95% MC 0.54%–0.63%; MC-SE ±0.02 pts) Final reach 0.6% ±0.02 Champion: 0.15% (95% MC 0.13%–0.18%; MC-SE ±0.01 pts) Champion reach 0.2% ±0.01

On the central forecast, Sweden more likely than not reaches the Round of 32 (60%). Champion probability is 0.2% ± 0.01 pts.

Source · Oxford Football Forecasting model
Group F Confed Advance (top 2) Reach R32
1🇳🇱NetherlandsUEFA52.2%92.3%
2🇯🇵JapanAFC37.9%83.1%
3🇸🇪SwedenUEFA17.8%60.2%
4🇹🇳TunisiaCAF6.6%33.2%

Source · Oxford Football Forecasting model

Bracket position Half 0 · Quadrant 0

Earliest possible meetings

No collision rows recorded for this team.

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

Match 12 · 2026-06-15 · Monterrey Stadium home
Sweden Tunisia
46.6% win 30.5% draw 22.9% loss
Most likely 1–0 (14.1%) λ 1.31–0.84 Over 2.5 37% · BTTS 43%
Match 35 · 2026-06-20 · Houston Stadium away
Sweden Netherlands
16.7% win 24.7% draw 58.6% loss
Most likely 0–1 (11.9%) λ 0.85–1.79 Over 2.5 49% · BTTS 49%
Match 57 · 2026-06-25 · Dallas Stadium away
Sweden Japan
22.8% win 29.2% draw 48% loss
Most likely 1–1 (13.6%) λ 0.89–1.40 Over 2.5 40% · BTTS 46%
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 Sweden. 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

Sweden vs the field

Elo rating: 1712 vs field median 1780 (0.96× the field) Elo rating 1712 med 1780 Recent NT form: 1.40 ppg vs field median 1.87 ppg (0.75× the field) Recent NT form 1.40 ppg med 1.87 ppg Squad value: €414M vs field median €286M (1.45× the field) Squad value €414M med €286M Squad form (global): 0.204 vs field median 0.211 (0.97× the field) Squad form (global) 0.204 med 0.211 Fitness readiness: 0.741 vs field median 0.707 (1.05× the field) Fitness readiness 0.741 med 0.707 Familiarity / chemistry: 0.000 vs field median 0.015 (0.00× the field) Familiarity / chemistry 0.000 med 0.015 Experience (mean caps): 21 vs field median 25 (0.83× 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

Sweden on the decoupling axis

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

g = +0.41 ± 0.08: the squad is valued above its record — the transfer market rates this side above what its results have earned.

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
25.1mean age
21mean caps
54%in a top-5 league
26distinct clubs
1largest club bloc
# Player Pos Club League Club min Gls Caps NT gls
1Jacob Widell ZetterströmGKDerby CountyChampionship +2.21z3,510030
2Gustaf LagerbielkeDFBragaPrimeira Liga +1.14z3,5912112
3Victor Lindelöf (captain)DFAston VillaPremier League +2.21z1,8290763
4Isak HienDFAtalantaSerie A +1.70z2,9451290
5Gabriel GudmundssonDFLeeds UnitedPremier League +2.21z2,9391240
6Herman JohanssonDFFC Dallasno club data30
7Lucas BergvallMFTottenham HotspurPremier League +2.21z1,6531100
8Daniel SvenssonDFBorussia DortmundBundesliga +1.84z3,9115130
9Alexander IsakFWLiverpoolPremier League +2.21z1,04445817
10Benjamin NygrenMFCelticPremiership −0.28z2860113
11Anthony ElangaFWNewcastle UnitedPremier League +2.21z2,2173306
12Viktor JohanssonGKStoke CityChampionship +2.21z2,7900120
13Ken SemaMFPafosno club data335
14Hjalmar EkdalDFBurnleyPremier League +2.21z1,7190130
15Carl StarfeltDFCelta VigoLa Liga +2.13z2,4021180
16Jesper KarlströmMFUdineseSerie A +1.70z3,3231250
17Viktor GyökeresFWArsenalPremier League +2.21z3,633213320
18Yasin AyariMFBrighton & Hove AlbionPremier League +2.21z2,0364213
19Mattias SvanbergMFVfL WolfsburgBundesliga +1.84z1,2313412
20Eric SmithDFFC St. PauliBundesliga +1.84z2,636220
21Alexander BernhardssonDFHolstein Kiel2. Bundesliga +1.84z1,4984110
22Besfort ZeneliMFUnion Saint-GilloiseJupiler Pro League −0.07z781380
23Kristoffer NordfeldtGKAIKno club data210
24Elliot StroudDFMjällby AIFAllsvenskan +0.23z2,449910
25Gustaf NilssonFWClub BruggeJupiler Pro League −0.07z1,1515104
26Taha AliFWMalmö FFno club data20

Source · Official squad announcements · API-Football (global club coverage). 4 of 26 players have no club season matched in API-Football — shown as “— no club data”, not imputed. Form coverage for this squad: 85%.

Diaspora in the hosts

48,533

5.0 per 1,000 of home population

Host-language familiarity

Foreign

primary language Swedish

Climate adaptation gap

+8.9°C

home-vs-venue heat differential

Venue extremes

47°C

peak heat index · altitude up to 493 m

Travel

8h

max time-zone shift · nearest venue 6,057 km

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

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

Sweden — Elo since 1950

1770 world #53
Sweden Qualified-field median

Sweden ends the series at 1770 Elo, the world’s 53rd-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.

85% Squad club-form coverage Share of this squad with a matched club season feeding the global form layer.
85% 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 Sweden, 4 of 26 players are shown as “— no club data”. Full validation, calibration & conformal coverage →