A like-for-like fighter comparison
Fight previews live and die on the tale of the tape, but the numbers that actually predict the action are the performance metrics — how accurately a fighter strikes, how well they defend takedowns, how often they hunt submissions, and how much volume they land. This tool takes those four figures for two fighters and lays out a clear, category-by-category advantage matrix.
How it works
Each of the four metrics is compared directly between the fighters, and an arrow points to the leader. To produce one overall edge, the values are normalised so they sit on a comparable 0-to-1 scale and then averaged with equal weight:
striking accuracy → value / 100 (percent)
takedown defence → value / 100 (percent)
submission attempts → value / 5 (per 15 min, capped at 1)
sig. strikes/min → value / 8 (SLpM, capped at 1)
overall score = average of the four normalised valuesThe fighter with the higher overall score is reported as holding the statistical edge, along with the size of the gap. Capping the rate metrics prevents an extreme outlier in one category from dominating the whole comparison.
Tips and example
Fighter A: 52% striking accuracy, 80% takedown defence, 1.2 submission attempts, 4.5 SLpM. Fighter B: 47% accuracy, 65% defence, 2.5 submissions, 3.8 SLpM. A leads in accuracy, defence, and volume; B leads in submission hunting. The weighted average favours A by a modest margin.
Notes: enter realistic values pulled from a stats provider. Because the model weights categories equally, it will not capture a stylistic mismatch — a high-volume striker who can be taken down may still lose to a grappler the numbers slightly favour the striker. Treat the edge as a discussion starter.
What each metric actually tells you
Understanding what you are feeding in improves how you read the output.
Striking accuracy is the percentage of total strikes that land — both significant and non-significant, depending on the tracking source. A low accuracy can mean the fighter throws a lot of jabs to gauge distance (volume-first style) rather than that their power shots miss. Two fighters at 45% and 55% accuracy can have very different styles.
Takedown defence measures how often a fighter stops opponents’ takedown attempts before they reach the mat. A wrestler with 75% defence has stuffed three of every four shots. This matters enormously in mixed-rules competition: a striker with poor defence will spend far more time on the ground than their striking stats would suggest.
Submission attempts per 15 minutes captures grappling aggression on the ground. High numbers here (above 2.0) usually indicate a Brazilian jiu-jitsu or wrestling specialist who actively hunts the finish rather than simply surviving ground exchanges. Context matters: attempts climbs naturally as a fighter spends more total time grappling.
Significant strikes per minute (SLpM) counts meaningful strikes (power shots and clean techniques as defined by the stat provider) per minute of cage time. A figure above 5 is considered high-volume for most weight classes. Unlike total strikes, significant strikes excludes quick tap jabs and is the number most predictive of finish rate.
Reading the matrix honestly
The overall statistical edge is a rough signal, not a prediction. A fighter who dominates three categories by a small margin can lose to one who trails in three but has an extreme advantage in one — for example a submission artist who is slower to land strikes but regularly finishes fights from the back. Use the matrix to identify the key skill gap: if the advantage column is nearly tied everywhere except takedown defence, that gap is the story of the stylistic matchup.