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

Gautier Lloris

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

Current Team
Le Havre
Position
Centre Back
Also: Defender
Date of Birth
Jul 18, 1995 (30)
Jersey Number
#4
League
Ligue 1
Back to PlayersCompare PlayerOpen RankingsView Methodology
Gautier Lloris
Gautier Lloris
Current profile snapshot
Current Team
Le Havre
Position
Centre Back
Also: Defender
Date of Birth
Jul 18, 1995 (30)
Jersey Number
#4
TactiQ Score
73.2
90% confidence
TactiQ Score v2
73.2
Form Score
68.6
Confidence
90%
Role
center_back
League
Ligue 1
Per 90 minutes
Goals
0.04
Assists
0.04
Key Pass
0.16
Tackles
1.62
Rating
6.96
Multi-season trend
AI Analysis
Generated May 6, 2026

A fringe-level center back in Ligue 1 with an FQ Score of 47.38, placing him in the bottom half of all scored players — well below the threshold expected of a reliable top-flight starter. Across 26 matches and 2,130 minutes this season, his per-90 output is thin: 1.56 tackles, 0.17 key passes, and a 6.93 average rating. The absence of granular sub-score data limits full positional assessment, but the overall picture is of a player with limited impact at this level.

Why this score

The FQ Score of 47.38 is driven primarily by below-baseline overall output for a center back role, where defensive solidity and consistency are the core value drivers. All role-specific sub-scores (defense, physical duel, progression) are null, meaning the score rests on surface-level metrics that paint a picture of low-volume, low-impact contribution.

Form Trajectory

Form score of 44.17 sits 3.21 points below the FQ Score of 47.38, placing this player in stable-to-soft decline territory — not an acute drop, but no upward signal either. The decline is consistent rather than episodic, suggesting this is a baseline performance level rather than a temporary dip.

Similar Profiles
Players with comparable scoring profiles in the same role
Pau Francisco Torres

Nearly identical FQ Score (47.13 vs 47.38) places both players in the same fringe-starter band; Torres provides a like-for-like benchmark at this scoring tier.

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
28
Minutes
2310
Goals
1
Assists
1
Key passes
4
Rating
6.94
Tackles
41
Shots on target
5
Successful dribbles
1
Clean sheets
4
2 Seasons Ago
TQ 70.7Form 71.2
Previous
TQ 70.4Form 70.9
Current
TQ 68.1Form 68.6
Per 90 minutes
Goals
0.04
Assists
0.04
Key Passes
0.16
Tackles
1.62
Rating
6.96
Eric Anders Smith

A close FQ Score match at 46.79 makes Smith a useful peer comparison, though contextual league and role differences may account for subtle output variation.

Compare →
Michael Keane

Keane's FQ Score of 46.28 reflects a similar overall contribution ceiling; as a more established name, he illustrates that this score band can include experienced players whose output has plateaued rather than developing ones.

Compare →
Current indicators
What the live season sample is surfacing right now
Heavy minute load
2310 minutes suggest a significant current role in the squad rotation.
Defensive activity
41 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
Defensive output

1.56 tackles per 90 is the only available defensive volume signal, and without duel success rates, interception counts, or clearance data, it is impossible to confirm even baseline defensive reliability — a critical gap for evaluating a center back.

Attacking contribution

0.04 goals and 0.04 assists per 90, alongside 0.17 key passes per 90, represent minimal output in any phase of play — well below what modern center backs in top leagues are expected to contribute in build-up or set-piece situations.

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 →