🎯

Fixture360 only lists fixtures from a curated set of leagues, chosen specifically to keep our prediction model accurate.

📋

Poisson model rates 1. FC Köln at 45%, yet other data sources diverge — this 1. FC Köln vs 1. FC Heidenheim fixture contains genuine analytical tension.

✍️ Match Preview

Analysis

1. FC Heidenheim make the trip to RheinEnergieStadion to face 1. FC Köln in Bundesliga, Regular Season - 33. The match kicks off on Sunday 10 May 2026 at 16:30 UTC.

Form & Momentum

1. FC Köln have collected 0.90 PPG across 10 Bundesliga outings this season: 1W 6D 3L. Last five: D W D L D. Offensively they are averaging 1.60 goals per game, with 1.80 conceded. Both teams have scored in 90% of their matches — an extremely high rate that makes BTTS Yes a well-supported standalone angle from their form alone.

1. FC Köln's form when playing at home: 3W 2D 5L across 10 games at RheinEnergieStadion this term (1.10 PPG). At home they are averaging 1.50 goals scored and 1.70 conceded per game. Both teams have scored in 80% of their home games — an outstanding BTTS rate that is a key data point for this fixture.

1. FC Heidenheim (all games): 2W 4D 4L across 10 Bundesliga outings this term — 1.00 points per game. Last five: D W L W D. They are scoring at 1.90 per game and conceding 2.10. Conceding 2.10 per game is a high rate — their defensive vulnerabilities have been exposed regularly this season. 1 clean sheet from 10 outings suggests some defensive organisation. Both teams have scored in 70% of their games — a noteworthy BTTS rate that supports the Yes market.

1. FC Heidenheim's form when playing away from home: 0W 3D 7L across 10 road games this term (0.30 PPG). Away from home they average 1.10 goals scored and 1.90 conceded per game. Both teams have scored in 70% of their away matches — a high BTTS rate on the road that directly informs this fixture. Their away PPG of 0.30 is notably below their overall 1.00 — form away from home has been a clear weakness this season.

A near-identical PPG reading — 0.90 for 1. FC Köln, 1.00 for 1. FC Heidenheim — means the form record is uninstructive on result selection. The goals and market sections will carry greater evidential weight.

The BTTS picture is exceptionally clear (using home/away splits) — 1. FC Köln register both teams scoring in 80% of relevant games, 1. FC Heidenheim in 70%. Both sides above 70% makes BTTS Yes one of the strongest standalone angles in this fixture.

Head-to-Head

Form and model data should carry more weight here — the historical record is too balanced to provide a directional steer. From 3 meetings: 1. FC Köln 0W, 1. FC Heidenheim 1W, 2D.

These two sides have produced goals at a consistent rate historically, averaging 3.7 per game across 3 meetings. That scoring profile provides genuine support for the Over 2.5 angle. The most recent clash, on 10 Jan 2026, ended 2–2 with a draw.

With the win record balanced, the strongest H2H-derived signal is in the goals market. At 3.7 goals per game historically, Over 2.5 is the cleaner angle to extract from the head-to-head data.

Trading Data

1. FC Köln goal-timing and half-time pattern breakdown (66 games, 33 at home): they score before half-time in 70% of fixtures in home games; when goalless at HT, a second-half goal follows 100% of the time; two or more arrive in the second half on 52% of those occasions; BTTS occurs in 73% of their matches (home games); Over 2.5 goals lands in 67% of games (home games); Over 3.5 in 36%.

1. FC Heidenheim goal-timing and half-time pattern breakdown (66 games, 33 at away): they score before half-time in 82% of fixtures in away games; when goalless at HT, a second-half goal follows 86% of the time; BTTS occurs in 58% of their matches (away games); Over 2.5 goals lands in 61% of games (away games); Over 3.5 in 39%; they fail to score in 38% of games.

BTTS rates are mixed from the trading data — 1. FC Köln 65% versus 1. FC Heidenheim 53%; no strong lean in either direction. The over/under 2.5 picture is inconclusive from the in-play data (1. FC Köln 58% | 1. FC Heidenheim 64%).

Poisson Model

The Poisson distribution model projects 1. FC Köln 1.85 xG and 1. FC Heidenheim 1.56 xG. These expected goals figures are the primary input: they feed a goal-probability matrix across all scoreline combinations to derive the result and market probabilities below. Underlying strength ratings: 1. FC Köln attack 0.974 / defence 1.194 | 1. FC Heidenheim attack 0.891 / defence 1.099. League average goals — home 1.732 / away 1.466. Data: 32 1. FC Köln games / 66 1. FC Heidenheim games used (CurrentSeason).

Result probabilities: 1. FC Köln 45% | Draw 22% | 1. FC Heidenheim 33%. Fair-value odds: 1. FC Köln 2.22 | Draw 4.55 | 1. FC Heidenheim 3.03. 1. FC Köln hold a narrow Poisson edge at 45% — the draw (22%) is close enough to merit draw-inclusive market consideration.

Goals markets: Over 2.5 probability 66% | BTTS probability 67% | Total xG 3.42. Over 2.5 is the model's clear signal at 66% — a total xG of 3.42 means the expected score alone exceeds the 2.5 threshold, making the Over not just likely but structurally supported by both sides' attack/defence profiles. BTTS Yes at 67% reflects that both xG figures (1.85 / 1.56) are above the threshold where scoring blanks become the primary outcome — both sides are projected to find the net.

Verdict

The Poisson model's primary lean is 1. FC Köln at 45% — moderate model lean. Draw probability of 22% warrants consideration of Double Chance or Draw No Bet on 1. FC Köln if the outright odds are short. The opposing side holds a 33% win probability per the model — this is not a banker and should be staked accordingly.

Poisson projects 3.42 total expected goals, pointing to Over 2.5 at 66% probability — strong conviction, supported by form averaging 3.1 goals per game and H2H averaging 3.7 goals per meeting.

On the BTTS market, Poisson puts 67% on Yes. Form rates corroborate: 1. FC Köln 80% | 1. FC Heidenheim 70% BTTS from recent games.

The outsider holds a 33% win probability per the model — this is not a banker and should not be treated as one. Proportionate stakes are appropriate given the genuine contest the data projects.

🔮 Your Prediction

Sign in to submit your prediction and see how it compares to the rest of the community.

💡 Key Insights