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

Javi Galán

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

Current Team
Osasuna
Position
Left Back
Also: Full Back / Wing Back
Date of Birth
Nov 19, 1994 (31)
Jersey Number
#20
League
La Liga
Back to PlayersCompare PlayerOpen RankingsView Methodology
Javi Galán
Javi Galán
Current profile snapshot
Current Team
Osasuna
Position
Left Back
Also: Full Back / Wing Back
Date of Birth
Nov 19, 1994 (31)
Jersey Number
#20
TactiQ Score
70.3
73% confidence
TactiQ Score v2
70.3
Form Score
67.3
Confidence
73%
Role
fullback_wingback
League
La Liga
Per 90 minutes
Goals
—
Assists
0.06
Key Pass
1.32
Tackles
2.58
Rating
7.00
Multi-season trend
AI Analysis
Generated Apr 30, 2026

A La Liga fullback/wingback sitting at 56.47 on the FQ scale — squarely in the adequate-starter tier, with no dimensional sub-scores available to identify a standout quality. The most distinctive readable signal is a 1.4 key passes per 90, which points to some involvement in build-up play, alongside 2.61 tackles per 90 suggesting active defensive engagement. With a confidence rating of 0.69, this evaluation carries moderate certainty — the picture is directionally reliable but not definitive.

Why this score

The FQ score of 56.47 reflects a player meeting positional baseline requirements without excelling in any measurable dimension — a conclusion reinforced by the absence of all sub-scores (finishing, creation, progression, defense all null), which prevents any single area from pulling the overall rating higher or lower. The per-90 data available — 0.06 assists, 1.4 key passes, 2.61 tackles — is consistent with a functional but unspectacular fullback profile.

Form Trajectory

Form score of 57.3 sits just 0.83 points above the FQ score of 56.47 — well within the ±5 stable band. There is no meaningful upward or downward momentum; this player is performing almost exactly in line with their established baseline across 16 matches and 1,412 minutes this season.

Similar Profiles
Players with comparable scoring profiles in the same role
Achraf Hakimi Mouh

Both sit in a narrow FQ band (56.05 vs 56.47) for the fullback/wingback role, though Hakimi's profile in higher-profile contexts typically reflects greater attacking output than what this player's per-90 data suggests.

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
17
Minutes
1502
Assists
1
Key passes
22
Rating
7.00
Tackles
43
Shots on target
1
Successful dribbles
36
Clean sheets
2
Current indicators
What the live season sample is surfacing right now
2 Seasons Ago
TQ 64.9Form 64.7
Previous
TQ 67.8Form 67.6
Current
TQ 65.8Form 67.3
Per 90 minutes
Goals
—
Assists
0.06
Key Passes
1.32
Tackles
2.58
Rating
7.00
Lucas Digne

Digne's FQ score of 54.21 places him just below this player in the same positional tier, with both profiling as functional starters; Digne's left-sided delivery has historically been a more defined strength than anything identifiable here given the null sub-scores.

Compare →
José Diogo Dalot Teixeira

Dalot's 53.63 FQ score is the closest floor comparison, both players occupying the adequate-starter band; Dalot's role in a higher-pressing system provides more defensive context than is available for this player.

Compare →
Creative involvement
Current snapshot shows meaningful chance supply and final-third contribution.
Defensive activity
43 tackles indicate active intervention volume in the current season sample.
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
Attacking output

0.06 assists per 90 is low for a wingback role where offensive contribution is a primary expectation; key passes of 1.4 per 90 suggest some involvement but no consistent threat creation.

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 →