Transfer Finder
“Find me a cheaper version of this player.” Nearest statistical profiles in the same position group with a lower estimated acquisition cost.
Target: Frenkie de Jong · 29 · Central midfielder · FC Barcelona · est. acquisition €14.8M – €35.7M
Similarity uses age, context-adjusted output, minutes share, performance percentile, league and team strength. Style/role similarity needs event data that the current free source lacks.
| Player | Similarity | Age | Pos | Market value | Est. acquisition | Model value | BI | Risk | Strengths | Differences |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fabián Ruiz Paris Saint-Germain · Ligue 1 | 57% | 30 | CM | €30.0M | €8.8M – €24.6M | €21.5M – €39.7M | 22/100 | Risk: High | Performance-implied value in the top 3% of MID peers; 585 minutes in continental competition | very similar |
| Leon Goretzka Bayern Munich · Bundesliga | 44% | 31 | CM | €12.0M | €4.3M – €14.5M | €11.2M – €28.4M | 5/100 | Risk: Low | Performance-implied value in the top 4% of MID peers; Estimated acquisition well below performance-implied value | 2 yrs older; 64% of minutes |
| Piotr Zielinski Inter Milan · Serie A | 44% | 32 | CM | €10.0M | €4.0M – €10.2M | €11.4M – €29.0M | 10/100 | Risk: Moderate | Performance-implied value in the top 5% of MID peers; Improving trajectory | 3 yrs older |
| Denzel Dumfries Inter Milan · Serie A | 44% | 30 | RM | €25.0M | €13.6M – €25.3M | €9.2M – €39.0M | 2/100 | Risk: High | Performance-implied value in the top 9% of MID peers | plays Right midfielder |
| Youri Tielemans Aston Villa · Premier League | 42% | 29 | CM | €30.0M | €12.4M – €30.2M | €31.2M – €70.1M | 8/100 | Risk: Low | Performance-implied value in the top 2% of MID peers; 554 minutes in continental competition | stronger league (1.30) |
| Frank Anguissa SSC Napoli · Serie A | 40% | 30 | CM | €15.0M | €4.2M – €12.0M | €13.6M – €37.9M | 14/100 | Risk: High | Performance-implied value in the top 4% of MID peers; Estimated acquisition well below performance-implied value | adj. G+A/90 0.24 vs 0.16 |
| Marcel Sabitzer Borussia Dortmund · Bundesliga | 40% | 32 | CM | €6.0M | €1.5M – €4.8M | €6.2M – €13.9M | 16/100 | Risk: Moderate | Performance-implied value in the top 10% of MID peers; Improving trajectory | 3 yrs older |
| Exequiel Palacios Bayer 04 Leverkusen · Bundesliga | 40% | 27 | CM | €25.0M | €12.8M – €26.5M | €6.8M – €15.1M | 4/100 | Risk: Moderate | Performance-implied value in the top 19% of MID peers | very similar |
| Mario Pašalić Atalanta BC · Serie A | 39% | 31 | CM | €6.0M | €2.6M – €5.9M | €5.8M – €27.5M | 12/100 | Risk: Low | Performance-implied value in the top 7% of MID peers; 604 minutes in continental competition | 2 yrs older |
| Xaver Schlager RB Leipzig · Bundesliga | 37% | 28 | CM | €10.0M | €4.1M – €12.3M | €3.4M – €12.4M | 18/100 | Risk: Low | Performance-implied value in the top 22% of MID peers | very similar |
| Joelinton Newcastle United · Premier League | 37% | 29 | CM | €25.0M | €10.0M – €24.5M | €20.5M – €37.7M | 14/100 | Risk: Low | Performance-implied value in the top 3% of MID peers; 591 minutes in continental competition | stronger league (1.30) |
| Ruben Loftus-Cheek AC Milan · Serie A | 37% | 30 | CM | €8.5M | €2.2M – €6.7M | €5.3M – €14.8M | 39/100 | Risk: High | Performance-implied value in the top 13% of MID peers; Improving trajectory | very similar |
| Youssouf Fofana AC Milan · Serie A | 36% | 27 | CM | €23.0M | €12.4M – €24.7M | €11.4M – €39.5M | 7/100 | Risk: Low | Performance-implied value in the top 10% of MID peers | 65% of minutes |
| Éderson Atalanta BC · Serie A | 36% | 26 | CM | €45.0M | €16.8M – €37.5M | €14.0M – €39.0M | 78/100 | Risk: Moderate | Performance-implied value in the top 10% of MID peers; 724 minutes in continental competition | 2 yrs younger; 65% of minutes |
| Mikel Merino Arsenal FC · Premier League | 35% | 30 | CM | €25.0M | €10.3M – €25.4M | €27.4M – €43.5M | 8/100 | Risk: Moderate | Performance-implied value in the top 2% of MID peers; 515 minutes in continental competition | stronger league (1.30); 30% of minutes; adj. G+A/90 0.26 vs 0.16 |