Published sample Ref LTN-26-1513676 Data through 21 Sep 2026
Latent.
ReportPlayer Report
ReferenceLTN-26-1513676
Data through21 Sep 2026
Sample · not a commissioned report

Prosper Obah.

Shakhtar DonetskNigeriaForward22 y179 cmAgencynot on record
Latent Level*
558 +152 vs UPL FW avg

*Latent Level: our cross-league performance index on a 0 to 1,000 scale, opponent-adjusted and calibrated on completed transfers — backtest published in full. UPL FW average, 25/26: 406 (n=48).

The verdict

Complete forward.
Ready to be a leading player at Ukrainian Premier League level.

Recommended fee band
€2.19m–€5.69m
IQR of the 10 closest comparable transfers that completed
Market value
€3m
Transfermarkt
Output alone prices
€892k
value model on performance only
€0comparable fees ran €400k–€10.5m · white mark = market value€11.13m
STRONGEST · DUEL WIN RATE 99thWEAKEST · PASS ACCURACY 59th

Prosper Obah is a 22-year-old forward at Shakhtar Donetsk. His statistical profile reads as a complete forward. In 25/26: 26 appearances, rotation starter.

His Level of 558 is above the average for an Ukrainian Premier League forward. On that gap he is ready to be a leading player at Ukrainian Premier League level. That reading has 8′ of UEFA Conference League football behind it, not league data alone.

He should cost €2.19m–€5.69m, a band drawn from 10 comparable transfers, against a recorded market value of €3m. His output alone prices lower (€892k); the band is what buyers actually paid for the closest comparable profiles, which is the price a selling club can hold.

The strongest thing in the file is duel win rate: 99th percentile among 48 forwards in the Ukrainian Premier League, 25/26. The weakest is pass accuracy, 59th in the same group.

01

The decision

fit, price, risk

The decision on Prosper Obah in three parts: which squads the numbers argue for, what profiles like his have cost, and what the file cannot vouch for.

Ranked first for fit
Genclerbirligi Ankara
of 8 clubs scored
Fee band
€2.19m–€5.69m
comparable transfers that completed
Risk flags
2
0 weak percentiles

1. Fit, ranked

8 clubs were scored on level, squad need and feasibility. Genclerbirligi Ankara is ranked first for fit: FW group is 5 deep against a league median of 8, 3 contracts up by Jun 2027. The engine reads him as a moderate step-up (Level 558 against a cohort average of 406). A rank is a statement about fit, not a forecast: the engine does not say where he goes, only which squads the numbers argue for.

RankClubStepSquad gapComparable feesPaid comps
1Genclerbirligi Ankara
TUR Türkiye
step upFW group 5 deep€1.38m–€6m4
2CF Montréal
MLS United States
step upFW group 6 deep€1.36m–€4.5m37
3Atlanta United FC
MLS United States
step upFW group 4 deep€1.36m–€4.5m37
4HNK Hajduk Split
CRO Croatia
step upFW group 7 deep€312k–€962k10
5Sporting Kansas City
MLS United States
step upFW group 6 deep€1.36m–€4.5m37

2. Price context

Recommended band
€2.19m–€5.69m
IQR of 10 comparable transfers
Market value
€3m
Transfermarkt
Output alone prices
€892k
value model on performance only

His recorded market value sits inside the band.

3. Risk flags

Risk flags

2 flags, 0 of them weak percentiles. Each is a number in this file, not an opinion; the section it comes from prints the detail.

  • evidence: Not collected in at least one of his competitions: progressive carries.
  • evidence: Squad facts behind the fit ranking are a snapshot from 2026-08-14; depth and contracts can have moved.

Higher-Level players have sold for higher fees: rank correlation +0.24 across 1257 sales abroad with a disclosed fee. The Level is a modest guide to playing time after a move: 39% of top-quartile players got at least 15 full matches of league football in a season at their new club, against 28% from the bottom quartile. Nothing on this page predicts who moves or who succeeds after moving. The fit ranking states which squads the numbers argue for; the price band states what comparable transfers fetched; the flags state what the file cannot vouch for.

02

Career development

Transfermarkt

1 completed outgoing move on record across 2025: 1 permanent, 0 loans, 1 permanent move abroad.

Completed moves
1
2025
Permanent / loans
1 / 0
1 abroad
Value at last move
€3m
Transfermarkt, 2025
SeasonMoveCountryFeeMarket valueAge
2025LNZ Cherkasy → Shakhtar D.Ukraine€4.5m€3m22

Market value is the Transfermarkt estimate at the time of the move, not a fee. “not recorded” means the source holds no figure - it never means zero.

Season data places him at Shakhtar Donetsk in the Ukrainian Premier League as of 25/26.

03

Latent Level vs league

SofaScore event data

The Latent Level is one number comparable across our seven leagues: a performance composite, adjusted for opponent strength within the league and for the league's own strength - calibrated on how players from each league actually fared after moving, not on reputation. It is an index on a 0 to 1,000 scale, not a percentile or a percentage, and cohort averages differ by competition - so it is only readable next to the positional average printed beside it.

Latent Level
558
152 above the positional average
Positional average
406
the average UPL forward, 25/26
Method
level-v2.3
1 season of Level history

His Level of 558 is above the average for an Ukrainian Premier League forward. That average is drawn from 48 forwards who played at least 270 minutes in the Ukrainian Premier League in the 2025/26 season.

Validation

Higher-Level players have sold for higher fees: rank correlation +0.24 across 1257 sales abroad with a disclosed fee. The Level is a modest guide to playing time after a move: 39% of top-quartile players got at least 15 full matches of league football in a season at their new club, against 28% from the bottom quartile.

The full backtest, with sample sizes, correlations and quartile hit rates, is printed in the Stated limits & methodology section at the end of this report.

Every percentile below ranks Prosper Obah within the group of 48 forwards who played at least 270 minutes in the Ukrainian Premier League in the 2025/26 season. He is compared only with players from his own league, season and position, never across leagues or divisions.

Sample
1,633′
26 matches, 16 starts
Peer group
48
forwards with 270+ minutes, UPL 25/26
Goals + assists
10+2
one every 136′

A percentile places him inside the peer group named above: 80 means he ranks above 80 percent of that group on the metric, and 50 is the middle of the pack. Sky bars mark clear strengths (70 or higher), dark bars clear weaknesses (30 or lower); the faded bars sit in between. Grey bars count volume - how much of something he does, not how well - so a longer grey bar is not automatically better. “—” means no rank is published for that metric: the sample behind it is too small, or the metric is covered for only part of the season, so a percentile would mislead. “not recorded” means the competition does not collect that stat.

Goalsclear strength in this group
0.55 /90
84
Assistsclear strength in this group
0.11 /90
78
Shotsclear strength in this group
2.37 /90
74
Shots on targetclear strength in this group
1.16 /90
78
Shot conversionclear strength in this group
23.3%
88
Shot accuracy
48.8%
66
Key passesclear strength in this group
1.21 /90
91
Progressive carriesnot collected in the UPL
not recorded
—
Pass accuracy
74.1%
59
Ball recoveriesclear strength in this group
3.91 /90
86
Touchesvolume: how much, not how well
41.56 /90
97
Duels contestedvolume: how much, not how well
17.31 /90
62
Duel win rateclear strength in this group
43.0%
99
SeasonClubLeagueMinGoals/90Assists/90Shots/90KP/90Pass %Duel win %
25/26Shakhtar DonetskUPL (tier 1)1,6330.550.112.371.2174.1%43.0%
04

Level trajectory

Latent Level, in time

One season carries a Level, so the trajectory is read inside it. 8 monthly checkpoints, each a rating that was computable on that date against the full-season cohort of 48 forwards. The swing across the season was 53 points, against a positional average of 406.

How the UPL 25/26 Level was built

542568.5595Sep 2025Oct 2025Nov 2025Dec 2025Feb 2026Mar 2026Apr 2026May 2026558Latent Level

Season-to-date rating at the end of each month once he had passed 270 minutes: lowest 542 (Sep 2025), highest 595 (Apr 2026), finishing on 558 after 1,633 minutes.

ThroughMinutes to dateComponentsLevel
Sep 20253406542
Oct 20256076560
Nov 20259596576
Dec 20251,0456586
Feb 20261,1096580
Mar 20261,1236580
Apr 20261,2776595
May 20261,6336558

Each checkpoint rescores his season-to-date per-90s at the end of that month against the full-season cohort of players in his position and competition, with opponent adjustment and the continental factor held at their season values, so the last checkpoint equals his published Level.

05

Transfer analysis

Destination shortlist

His own record holds 1 permanent move abroad: Shakhtar D. (Ukraine, €4.5m). Fees paid for him so far: €4.5m to Shakhtar D..

Genclerbirligi Ankara · TUR · Türkiye

The gap. FW group is 5 deep against a league median of 8, 3 contracts up by Jun 2027.

Why it is realistic. A step up in club level (Genclerbirligi Ankara squad averages €1.4m a player vs €808k at his current club), and 38 Ukraine to Türkiye moves already on record.

The cost. Comparable moves went for €1.4m–€6.0m (from 4 paid transfers into Türkiye); most corridor moves were free transfers.

CF Montréal · MLS · United States

The gap. FW group is 6 deep against a league median of 8, averages 25.8 years to his 22, 3 contracts up by Jun 2027.

Why it is realistic. A step up in club level (CF Montréal squad averages €1.4m a player vs €808k at his current club), and 9 Ukraine to United States moves already on record.

The cost. Comparable moves went for €1.4m–€4.5m (from 37 paid transfers into United States); most corridor moves were free transfers.

Atlanta United FC · MLS · United States

The gap. FW group is 4 deep against a league median of 8, averages 32.8 years to his 22, 3 contracts up by Jun 2027.

Why it is realistic. A step up in club level (Atlanta United FC squad averages €1.7m a player vs €808k at his current club), and 9 Ukraine to United States moves already on record.

The cost. Comparable moves went for €1.4m–€4.5m (from 37 paid transfers into United States); most corridor moves were free transfers.

HNK Hajduk Split · CRO · Croatia

The gap. FW group is 7 deep against a league median of 10, 3 contracts up by Jun 2027.

Why it is realistic. A step up in club level (HNK Hajduk Split squad averages €1.1m a player vs €808k at his current club), and 19 Ukraine to Croatia moves already on record.

The cost. Comparable moves went for €312k–€962k (from 10 paid transfers into Croatia); most corridor moves were free transfers.

Sporting Kansas City · MLS · United States

The gap. FW group is 6 deep against a league median of 8, averages 25.3 years to his 22, 3 contracts up by Jun 2027.

Why it is realistic. A step up in club level (Sporting Kansas City squad averages €1.5m a player vs €808k at his current club), and 9 Ukraine to United States moves already on record.

The cost. Comparable moves went for €1.4m–€4.5m (from 37 paid transfers into United States); most corridor moves were free transfers.

Erzurumspor FK · TUR · Türkiye

The gap. FW group is 8 deep against a league median of 8, averages 26.4 years to his 22, 4 contracts up by Jun 2027.

Why it is realistic. A step up in club level (Erzurumspor FK squad averages €1.4m a player vs €808k at his current club), and 38 Ukraine to Türkiye moves already on record.

The cost. Comparable moves went for €1.4m–€6.0m (from 4 paid transfers into Türkiye); most corridor moves were free transfers.

Gaziantep FK · TUR · Türkiye

The gap. FW group is 8 deep against a league median of 8, 4 contracts up by Jun 2027.

Why it is realistic. A step up in club level (Gaziantep FK squad averages €1.4m a player vs €808k at his current club), and 38 Ukraine to Türkiye moves already on record.

The cost. Comparable moves went for €1.4m–€6.0m (from 4 paid transfers into Türkiye); most corridor moves were free transfers.

Oud-Heverlee Leuven · BEL · Belgium

The gap. FW group of 8, averages 24.1 years to his 22, 3 contracts up by Jun 2027.

Why it is realistic. A step up in club level (Oud-Heverlee Leuven squad averages €1.3m a player vs €808k at his current club), and 13 Ukraine to Belgium moves already on record.

The cost. Comparable moves went for €425k–€1.3m (from 6 paid transfers into Belgium).

Each card's cost line is what completed moves on that route have gone for - it prices the route, not the player. The recommended range for Prosper Obah himself is €2.19m–€5.69m, from his closest comparable transfers (Valuation & comps). Where a route's band sits above it, that is the destination market's price level, not a higher valuation of him.

06

Style profile & similar players

Style engine

Prosper Obah is a Complete forward. Below: his nearest statistical neighbours side by side, then the ones who earned a move and what it cost.

Archetype
Complete forward
duel win rate 99th · touches 97th · key passes 91st
Similar players
7
nearest neighbours, same league + position
With a completed move
8
each move and fee below

Style vector

goalsshot volumeshots on targetconversionshot accuracyassistskey passestoucheslong ballspass accuracyrecoveriesclearancesduel volumeduel win rate
ShootingPassing & creationDefensive work

Axes are percentiles among 48 forwards in Ukrainian Premier League 25/26. Related metrics sit on the same arc, so the shape reads as a style: it describes how he plays, not how good he is.

Nearest statistical neighbours

PlayerClubconversiongoalstoucheskey passesduel win raterecoveriesSimilarity
Prosper ObahShakhtar Donetsk888497919986—
Lassina TraoréShakhtar Donetsk99958299805184
EguinaldoShakhtar Donetsk85939545937082
Kauã EliasShakhtar Donetsk53887693958280
Mykola HaiduchykPolissya Zhytomyr69869395647278
Eduardo GuerreroDynamo Kyiv42767482672678
Pylyp BudkivskyiZoria Luhansk80825751975978
Mark AssinorLNZ Cherkasy48627070596476

Similarity is 0–100, computed from the full percentile vector shown above, within league and position. The stat columns are his most defining axes, two per category, as percentiles on the same scope as the radar. Method: comps v2.0 (2026-08-15).

Similar players who moved

PlayerMoved toSeasonFeeSeason before the moveSimilarityBiggest gap vs Prosper Obah
Mykola HaiduchykPolissya, Ukraine2025€260k26 y · 1,463′ · 9 G 0 A78assists 24 vs 78
Baboucarr FaalViktoria Plzeň, Czech Republic2026€3.00m22 y · 2,303′ · 9 G 5 A74clearances 88 vs 24
Danylo KravchukLNZ Cherkasy, Ukraine2025free transfer24 y · 785′ · 3 G 0 A74assists 24 vs 78
Denys NdukveVeres Rivne, Ukraine2025loan transfer25 y · 1,284′ · 5 G 1 A74long balls 14 vs 68
Igor KrasnopirPolissya, Ukraine2025€1.20m23 y · 1,713′ · 6 G 4 A73recoveries 22 vs 86
Oleksandr FilippovPolissya, Ukraine2025free transfer33 y · 924′ · 4 G 1 A71duel win rate 16 vs 99
Peter ItodoMetalist 1925, Ukraine2025€700k22 y · 1,738′ · 7 G 0 A69recoveries 9 vs 86
Vadym SydunEpicentr, Ukraine2025free transfer20 y · 2,066′ · 8 G 1 A69touches 26 vs 97

Every player here profiles close to Prosper Obah and completed a real move on record: the fee is what that profile fetched, and the season column is what he was producing when it happened. Most of these moves stayed inside Ukraine: the table prices domestic demand for the profile; the case for a move abroad rests on the corridor evidence in Transfer analysis.

07

Form & usage

Match-by-match

How Prosper Obah is trending match by match in the UPL 25/26 - not the season average, but the direction of travel. Each reading is his trailing 10 appearances, a window wide enough to smooth one-game noise while still moving when his level does, with every match weighed by opposition difficulty.

This log covers his 25/26 season at LNZ Cherkasy - before his move to Shakhtar Donetsk, whose fixtures can therefore appear here as opposition.

Appearances
26
16 starts, 10 as sub
Start rate
53%
of his club's finished matches
Full 90s
44%
of his starts completed

Usage pattern: rotation starter · 82′ average when starting · 33′ when introduced · 60% of his club's available minutes.

Goals + assists /90

0.350.590.8310-2511-2102-2704-1305-0305-170.52

Shots /90

1.782.39310-2511-2102-2704-1305-0305-172.06

Key passes /90

0.521.21.8910-2511-2102-2704-1305-0305-170.52

Duel win rate

38.8%43.9%49%10-2511-2102-2704-1305-0305-1748.4%

Touches /90

Involvement metric - higher is not automatically better.

38.0142.5947.1710-2511-2102-2704-1305-0305-1745.17

Ball recoveries /90

2.724.536.3310-2511-2102-2704-1305-0305-175.5

Trailing rate over the last 10 appearances, every match weighed by opposition difficulty. A gap in a line means the window fell below the minutes gate for that stat - withheld rather than invented, never zero. Grey lines are involvement metrics, not better-is-higher.

DateOpponentResultOpp. difficultyMinGARole
2025-11-21SC Poltava (A)W 2-00.3290′20start
2025-11-29Kudrivka (H)W 1-00.6988′01start
2025-12-06Obolon Kyiv (H)W 3-00.7186′01start
2026-02-27NK Veres Rivne (H)W 1-00.7664′00start
2026-03-06Oleksandria (A)W 1-00.4314′00sub
2026-04-05Rukh Lviv (H)W 3-00.5150′00start
2026-04-13LNZ Cherkasy (A)D 2-21.473′00sub
2026-04-23Zoria Luhansk (A)W 2-11.1275′10start
2026-04-26Kudrivka (A)W 3-10.6926′00sub
2026-05-03Dynamo Kyiv (A)W 2-11.3949′00sub
2026-05-10SC Poltava (A)W 4-00.3271′00start
2026-05-13Obolon Kyiv (H)W 3-10.7171′00start
2026-05-17FC Kryvbas Kryvyi Rih (A)W 3-21.1775′20sub
2026-05-21Kolos Kovalivka (H)L 0-11.2090′00start

Opposition difficulty is the opponent's points-per-match from our own finished results, 1.0 = league average - a per-match weight, never a league table; “—” = under 5 matches played. Showing the 14 most recent of 26 appearances.

Availability, not injury data

A gap in the match log means his club played without him - that is all our data records. The reason (selection, fitness, registration) is not recorded, and we do not guess at it.

08

Continental evidence

UEFA club competitions
European matches
1
8′ on the pitch
Competitions
1
UECL
Strongest opponents
Lech Poznań
Poland
CompetitionMatchesMinutes
UEFA Conference League18
No step-up comparison drawn

1 match(es) and 8′ is not a sample that supports domestic-vs-continental rates, so none are computed - a per-90 line from this little football would be noise dressed as signal. The match log below is the full extent of the European record.

DateCompetitionOpponentHis club at the timeMinTouches
2026-03-12UECL · Round of 16Lech Poznań (Poland)Shakhtar Donetsk8′4
09

Valuation & comps

Value engine

What Prosper Obah should cost, grounded in what comparable players actually cost. His market value is set against a performance model built on his own age and position group (n=1,837); the range below comes from 30 comparable transfers with recorded fees, not from optimism.

Market value
€3m
Transfermarkt estimate
Performance-predicted value
€892k
market value 236% above what his output predicts
Recommended range
€2.19m–€5.69m
IQR of the 10 closest of 30 comps · anchor: market value

These three numbers measure different things, and here the range sits above what his output alone predicts. That is not a conflict: the performance model prices output only, while the range is what buyers actually paid for the closest comparable profiles - profiles that, like his, sold on age and trajectory as well as the season's numbers. The range is the price a selling club can hold; the model number is the floor his output alone would justify.

Fee comps

recommended €2.2m–€5.7m€0€5.2m€10.5m202122232425moved abroadstayed in the marketage at transferfee

Shaded band = the recommended fee range. Filled points moved abroad; hollow points stayed in the same market. Stronger points are closer statistical matches; the closest set the range.

PlayerMoveFeeAgeSeason
Gabriel VidovicGNK Dinamo Zagreb → SC Paderborn€3m222026
Lawrence EnnaliGórnik Zabrze → Houston€2.75m222024
Baboucarr FaalKarpaty Lviv → Viktoria Plzeň€3m232026
Ianis StoicaFC Hermannstadt → Estrela Amadora€1.3m222025
Damir RedzicDAC Dunajska Streda → Salzburg€4.75m222025
Andrija RadulovicFK Vojvodina Novi Sad → Rapid Vienna€1.1m222025
Rwan CruzLudogorets Razgrad → Botafogo€8m232024
Tomas CvancaraAC Sparta Prague → Mönchengladbach€10.5m222023
Aleksandar CirkovicFK TSC Backa Topola → Ferencváros€2m232024
Louis MunteanuCFR Cluj → D.C. United€6m232025
Marin PetkovLevski Sofia → Al-Taawoun€1m222025
Mounsef BakrarGNK Dinamo Zagreb → Al Ahly€3m252026
Borisav BurmazFK Vozdovac → FC Rapid 1923€400k222023
Jay EnemOFK Beograd → Red Star€2m232026
Diogo BezerraOFK Beograd → Rio Ave€2m232025
Luis PalmaAris Thessaloniki → Celtic€4.75m232023
Camilo DuránQarabağ FK → Celtic€5.5m242026
Albion RrahmaniFC Rapid 1923 → Sparta Prague€6.13m232024
Raul FloruczNK Olimpija Ljubljana → Union SG€5m242025
Samuel AkereBotev Plovdiv → Widzew Lodz€750k212025
Veljko BirmancevicFK Cukaricki → Malmö€1m222020
Marco PašalićHNK Rijeka → Orlando€4.8m242024
Zsombor GruberFerencvárosi TC → La Louvière€1.7m212026
RickLudogorets Razgrad → CA Talleres€5.85m252024
Loizos LoizouOmonia Nicosia → Hapoel Tel Aviv€1.1m222025
Douglas OwusuRed Star Belgrade → Hapoel Tel Aviv€2.2m202026
Maksym BragaruDynamo Kyiv → Polissya€1.8m232026
Peter ItodoFC Dinamo City → Metalist 1925€700k222025
Sylvester JasperFK Zeleznicar Pancevo → Standard Liège€1m242026
Dominik MarczukJagiellonia Bialystok → Salt Lake€1.5m202024

Comps are completed transfers scored for closeness on age at the move, position, minutes load, output, the level of both leagues and recency; fees are as recorded, never asking prices. The recommended range is set by the closest matches, not the full spread plotted above: read it as what the market has recently paid for this profile. Method: comps v2.0 (2026-08-15).

10

Stated limits & methodology

How to read this report

Every number in this report is computed from sources we name, under rules we publish, with its gaps stated. What follows is the full list of methods and limits - including the things this report deliberately does not claim.

  • Percentiles. Computed within one league, one season, one position group, mid-rank with ties split. Published only when at least 10 players clear the minutes gate in that peer group (270′ in our top-flight coverage, 450′ in second-tier feeder coverage) - below that the percentile is withheld, never guessed. The peer-group n is printed beside every percentile in this report.
  • Missing is never zero. A metric a competition does not collect renders as “not recorded”; a rate whose sample is below the minutes gate renders as “—”. Neither is ever shown as zero, and no number in this report is imputed.
  • Cross-league comparisons. Raw percentiles are never compared across leagues or tiers. The only cross-league number we publish is the Latent Level, which is corridor-calibrated and backtested against post-move outcomes before it appears in any report.
  • Export Index. A composite score, not a percentile: an average of five outfield percentile components with a U-21 multiplier, so it can exceed 100. Goalkeepers carry no Export Index - it contains no goalkeeping.
  • Transfer history. From our own Transfermarkt-sourced transfer record. Where identity is matched by name rather than a verified ID, the report says so and does not present the history as fact.

The Latent Level backtest, in full

Section 2 states this as one claim; these are the complete figures behind it.

Backtested level-v2.3 on 3597 abroad moves out of the seven covered leagues with a pre-move Level and Transfermarkt post-move league minutes (best of first two destination seasons, nominal 2700 min). Spearman(Level, minutes retention) = +0.105 raw; +0.075 against the retention residual once destination difficulty, loan status and age are accounted for (within-league composite alone: +0.091). 'Stuck' = >=1350 league minutes: top Level quartile 39% vs bottom quartile 28%. On step-up moves only (destination fitted stronger than origin): top-quartile 29% (n=454) vs bottom-quartile 23% (n=478). Identity join is by normalized name + birth-year (59 ambiguous names dropped); minutes retention is an availability-inclusive outcome - injuries count as failures. Secondary receipt: on 1257 permanent exports with a disclosed fee, Spearman(pre-move Level, fee paid) = +0.241.

Level quartileLevel rangeMovesHitsHit rate
Q1 (lowest Level)36–32390524927.5%
Q2323–41989427330.5%
Q3419–51790629933.0%
Q4 (highest Level)517–93189235139.3%

A hit is at least 1,350 league minutes - fifteen full matches - in the player's best of his first two seasons at the destination club.

Not collected for these leagues

No provider records these for our coverage. This report will never claim them.

Event-location data. No xG, no heatmaps, no pass maps. Our sources do not carry ball coordinates for these leagues, and we do not model or fake them.

Physical data. No sprints, distances or top speeds. No source collects them for these leagues; any physical claim would be invented.

Not yet in our data

These exist at sources we already draw from but are not yet ingested. They are coverage gaps we intend to close; until then the report treats them as absent rather than guessing.

Contract terms. Contract-expiry dates exist at source but are not yet in our databases, so no figure in this report leans on contract length.

Injury and absence reasons. A gap in the match log means he was not on the pitch, and that is all it means - our data does not yet separate injury from non-selection.

Ball-carry coverage. The provider collects carry metrics for a minority of our competitions today. They appear only where a season's coverage is complete.

His coverage in our data

CompetitionTierSeasonSource
Ukrainian Premier League125/26per-match event data
Caveats specific to this player

Not recorded in at least one of his competitions: progressive carries

Sources: SofaScore (per-match), Transfermarkt (market & transfers). Generated 2026-09-21. Questions about any figure in this report are welcome - every one is reproducible from the stated method.

LATENT
Hidden value, measured.
Data through 21 Sep 2026 · SofaScore (per-match) · Transfermarkt (market & transfers)
Report contract v2.5 · Percentiles are never compared across leagues.
Same standard, your player

Request this for your player

Send the Transfermarkt link and the decision it has to support. Scope and a quote inside 24 hours; the report inside 48 of confirmation.