TactiQ
Sign InGet Started
TactiQ
Football Intelligence
Founding Beta

TactiQ is built around Player & Club Data, Match Intelligence, Predictive Modeling, and Research & Visualization — understand the system, not the surface.

Core
Club football as the permanent base
Launch
World Cup as the launch amplifier
Transparency
Public roadmap and visible system progress
The standard
Methodology →

Every score is deterministic, evidence-gated, and confidence-labelled. Football intelligence should be explainable — not a black box with a number on the front. The methodology is part of the product, not a legal page.

Deterministic scoringMulti-agent consensus gatedPublication gate active
Core
PlayersClubsMatchesWorld Cup 2026Roadmap
Product
CompareRankingsForecastMethodologyMembership
Legal
PrivacyTerms© 2026 TactiQ. All rights reserved.
Player Profile

Loading player profile...

Pulling current player details into TactiQ.

Player Profile

Alessandro Buongiorno

TactiQ Score, per-90 performance stats, and multi-season form — with direct routes into compare and rankings.

Current Team
Napoli
Position
Centre Back
Date of Birth
Jun 6, 1999 (26)
Jersey Number
#4
League
Serie A
Back to PlayersCompare PlayerOpen RankingsView Methodology
Alessandro Buongiorno
Alessandro Buongiorno
Current profile snapshot
Current Team
Napoli
Position
Centre Back
Date of Birth
Jun 6, 1999 (26)
Jersey Number
#4
TactiQ Score
75.3
93% confidence
TactiQ Score v2
75.3
Form Score
68.9
Confidence
93%
Role
center_back
League
Serie A
Per 90 minutes
Goals
—
Assists
0.04
Key Pass
0.11
Tackles
1.25
Rating
6.78
Multi-season trend
AI Analysis
Generated May 6, 2026

A Serie A center-back sitting at 52.76 on the FQ scale — squarely in the typical performer range (50-59) — with 30 appearances and 2,283 minutes this season. The most distinctive feature here is consistency at a modest level: form and overall scores are nearly identical, meaning this is not a player in flux but one performing at a stable, unremarkable baseline. Defensive output per 90 is limited, with 1.3 tackles and a 6.78 average match rating offering little separation from the positional median.

Why this score

With all sub-scores null, the FQ score of 52.76 is driven primarily by aggregate output metrics — notably a 1.3 tackles-per-90 rate and a 6.78 match rating that together suggest below-baseline defensive contribution for a center-back role. The performance agent's assessment of 47 underlines that no single defensive dimension is producing at a standout level.

Form Trajectory

Form score of 49.81 sits just 2.95 points below the FQ score of 52.76 — within the ±5 stable band. This is not a player trending up or declining sharply; the near-identical form and overall scores across a 30-match sample indicate a sustained, flat performance level.

Similar Profiles
Players with comparable scoring profiles in the same role
Cristian Gabriel Romero

Both sit in the 50-54 FQ range as center-backs, reflecting similar overall output levels; Romero's score of 53 is marginally higher, suggesting a slight edge in at least one defensive dimension.

Compare →
Rankings
See where this player sits across all scored players.

Top 50 players by TactiQ Score — filter by position, form, and confidence.

Open Rankings →
Compare
Put this player next to another and find the real edges.

TactiQ Score, form, confidence, and season stats compared side by side — instantly.

Compare Player →
Methodology
Understand exactly how this score was built.

Every TactiQ Score is deterministic and traceable. Read the full methodology behind the numbers.

View Methodology →
Latest available season snapshot

Live statistics currently available for this profile

9 metrics surfaced
Appearances
32
Minutes
2463
Assists
1
Key passes
3
Rating
6.75
Tackles
33
Shots on target
3
Successful dribbles
1
Clean sheets
12
Current indicators
What the live season sample is surfacing right now
2 Seasons Ago
TQ 78.6Form 78.8
Previous
TQ 73.3Form 73.4
Current
TQ 68.2Form 68.9
Per 90 minutes
Goals
—
Assists
0.04
Key Passes
0.11
Tackles
1.25
Rating
6.78
Kevin Diks

Diks scores 50.48, the closest FQ match in this peer group, indicating comparable aggregate contribution; as a fullback rather than center-back, his role demands differ in width and attacking output.

Compare →
Ibrahima Konaté

Konaté's 55.09 FQ score sits just above this player's 52.76, making him a useful ceiling reference at this tier; the gap, while small, likely reflects stronger duel or aerial metrics expected of a top-league center-back.

Compare →
Heavy minute load
2463 minutes suggest a significant current role in the squad rotation.
Defensive activity
33 tackles indicate active intervention volume in the current season sample.
Defensive outcomes
12 clean sheets are surfacing in the current live snapshot.
Strengths
Where this player is genuinely above baseline
No clearly elite traits identified in current data.
Watchpoints
Real gaps relative to this player's role
Defensive volume

1.3 tackles per 90 is the primary available defensive metric, and for a center-back in Serie A it signals limited active defensive engagement. No interception or clearance data is available to offset this reading.

Attacking contribution

0.04 assists and 0.12 key passes per 90 are negligible for any role, including center-back — this player adds virtually nothing in the build-up or creation phases.

Reading the score

What each number means

TactiQ Score

A 0–100 measure of overall quality. Combines statistical output with league difficulty, multi-season weighting, and a consistency factor. Target range for strong players: 70–85.

Form Score

Weighted toward recent matches. Can diverge from the TactiQ Score when current form is meaningfully stronger or weaker than the multi-season average.

Confidence

How much evidence supports this score. Lower confidence means thinner data — fewer seasons, fewer appearances, or gaps in coverage. A provisional score is real signal with appropriate caveats.

Methodology

TactiQ Scores are deterministic — given the same evidence, they produce the same output. The evidence packet system, confidence labels, and publication gate are all explained in full.

Read the full methodology →