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

Matthieu Udol

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

Current Team
Lens
Position
Left Back
Also: Full Back / Wing Back
Date of Birth
Mar 20, 1996 (30)
Jersey Number
#14
League
Ligue 1
Back to PlayersCompare PlayerOpen RankingsView Methodology
Matthieu Udol
Matthieu Udol
Current profile snapshot
Current Team
Lens
Position
Left Back
Also: Full Back / Wing Back
Date of Birth
Mar 20, 1996 (30)
Jersey Number
#14
TactiQ Score
68.0
97% confidence
TactiQ Score v2
68.0
Form Score
69.5
Confidence
97%
Role
fullback_wingback
League
Ligue 1
Per 90 minutes
Goals
0.03
Assists
0.22
Key Pass
1.63
Tackles
1.54
Rating
7.09
Multi-season trend
AI Analysis
Generated May 6, 2026

A Ligue 1 fullback/wingback sitting at 53.69 on the FQ scale — squarely in the typical performer range — with 30 appearances and 2,690 minutes providing a high-confidence (0.94) read on their level. The most distinctive on-ball output is 1.64 key passes per 90, which sits above what most fullbacks produce, while goal contributions are minimal at 0.03 goals and 0.23 assists per 90. No sub-score breakdowns are available, so the balance between defensive and attacking contribution cannot be precisely quantified.

Why this score

With all role-specific sub-scores returning null, the FQ score of 53.69 is driven by aggregate per-90 output and positional baseline calibration rather than any single standout dimension. The 7.09 average match rating and modest combined goal involvement (0.26 per 90) are consistent with a player meeting — but not exceeding — fullback/wingback baseline requirements.

Form Trajectory

Form score of 58.15 sits 4.46 points above the FQ score of 53.69 — within the ±5 stable band but nudging toward an upward signal. This represents roughly an 8% improvement over baseline, suggesting recent performances have been marginally better than the season-long average without yet constituting a clear trend shift.

Similar Profiles
Players with comparable scoring profiles in the same role
José Diogo Dalot Teixeira

Comparable FQ score (53.63 vs 53.69) reflects a similar overall output level for the fullback role; Dalot operates in a higher-profile club context which likely suppresses his individual FQ relative to his raw involvement.

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

10 metrics surfaced
Appearances
32
Minutes
2870
Goals
1
Assists
7
Key passes
52
Rating
7.09
Tackles
49
Shots on target
16
Successful dribbles
15
Clean sheets
11
2 Seasons Ago
TQ 62.9Form 62.7
Previous
TQ 67.3Form 66.8
Current
TQ 69.8Form 69.5
Per 90 minutes
Goals
0.03
Assists
0.22
Key Passes
1.63
Tackles
1.54
Rating
7.09
Lucas Digne

Digne's FQ of 54.21 places him in the same typical-performer band, with both players sharing a left-sided fullback profile; Digne's delivery from set pieces is a more defined strength than anything identifiable here given the absent sub-scores.

Compare →
Kieran Trippier

Trippier's FQ of 52.87 is the closest numerical match, reflecting similar aggregate contribution levels; Trippier's crossing and set-piece delivery are well-documented strengths that differentiate him from this player's less defined profile.

Compare →
Current indicators
What the live season sample is surfacing right now
Heavy minute load
2870 minutes suggest a significant current role in the squad rotation.
Creative involvement
Current snapshot shows meaningful chance supply and final-third contribution.
Defensive activity
49 tackles indicate active intervention volume in the current season sample.
Defensive outcomes
11 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
No notable gaps identified for this role.
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 →