Football 
Tennis 
Horse Racing History Says....Back Host Nations at the World Cup
What has home advantage been worth at the World Cup? By what margin do host nations improve when playing at home opposed to playing at a neutral venue? Have host nations been profitable to bet on at World Cups?
In this article:
- Host Advantage at the World Cup
- Home Advantage during World Cup qualification
- Betting on World Cup Host Nations
In this article I will be taking a look at the performance of host nations across the entire history of the World Cup.
I will then compare the performance of host nations with their performance at World Cups when they have not been hosting in an effort to quantify host advantage in terms of both improvement in goal difference and win percentage.
Lastly, I will take a look at whether or not it has been profitable to back host nations in both the 1X2 and Asian handicaps market since the 1998 World Cup.
For the purposes of this analysis, I have determined knockout stage matches by the result at the conclusion of regulation time. I have also eliminated 3rd place playoffs from the analysis. Further all betting results are based on betting at even stakes, meaning the return you would receive had you bet 1 unit on each possible outcome in the given betting market.
Summary of Conclusions:
Across the history of the World Cup….
- Host advantage has been worth +0.64 goals
- Hosts goals scored per match increases by 0.3 goals (from 1.51 to 1.81)
- Hosts goals conceded per match decreases by 0.34 goals (from 1.24 to 0.9)
- Hosts average match points increases by +0.46 points per match (from 1.54 to 2.0)
- Hosts win percentage increases by 16% (from 42.4% to 58.4%)
- Since 1998, backing hosts in the 1X2 market at even stakes has returned +2.17 units, a return of +5.86%.
- Since 1998, backing hosts in the Asian handicap market at even stakes has returned +10.01 units, a return of +27.05%.
Host Advantage at the World Cup
A total of 17 nations have hosted the World Cup, with five nations fortunate enough to have hosted the great event twice.
The table below shows the performance of each host through the history of the World Cup.
Table 1: Host performance for each World Cup
| Year | Host | Matches | Ave GF | Ave GA | Ave GD | W | D | L | AVE Pts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1930 | Uruguay | 4 | 3.75 | 0.75 | +3.00 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 3.00 |
| 1934 | Italy | 5 | 2.20 | 0.60 | +1.60 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2.20 |
| 1938 | France | 2 | 2.00 | 2.00 | 0.00 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1.50 |
| 1950 | Brazil | 6 | 3.67 | 1.00 | +2.67 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 2.17 |
| 1954 | Switzerland | 4 | 2.75 | 2.75 | 0.00 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1.50 |
| 1958 | Sweden | 6 | 2.00 | 1.17 | +0.83 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 2.17 |
| 1962 | Chile | 5 | 1.80 | 1.60 | +0.20 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 1.80 |
| 1966 | England | 6 | 1.50 | 0.50 | +1.00 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 2.33 |
| 1970 | Mexico | 4 | 1.50 | 1.00 | +0.50 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1.75 |
| 1974 | Germany | 7 | 1.86 | 0.57 | +1.29 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 2.57 |
| 1978 | Argentina | 7 | 1.86 | 0.57 | +1.29 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 2.00 |
| 1982 | Spain | 5 | 0.80 | 1.00 | -0.20 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1.00 |
| 1986 | Mexico | 5 | 1.20 | 0.40 | +0.80 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2.20 |
| 1990 | Italy | 6 | 1.33 | 0.17 | +1.17 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 2.67 |
| 1994 | USA | 4 | 0.75 | 1.00 | -0.25 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1.00 |
| 1998 | France | 7 | 2.00 | 0.29 | +1.71 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 2.43 |
| 2002 | East Asia | 10 | 1.00 | 0.60 | +0.40 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 1.60 |
| 2006 | Germany | 6 | 1.83 | 0.50 | +1.33 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 2.33 |
| 2010 | South Africa | 3 | 1.00 | 1.67 | -0.67 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1.33 |
| 2014 | Brazil | 6 | 1.83 | 1.83 | 0.00 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1.83 |
| 2018 | Russia | 5 | 2.00 | 1.20 | +0.80 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1.60 |
| Total | 113 | 1.81 | 0.90 | +0.91 | 66 | 28 | 19 | 2.00 |
In total, hosts have played 113 matches, earning an average of 2 match points per match. (Earning 3 points per victory and 1 point for a draw). Across all World Cup matches played, hosts or otherwise, the average points earned per match is 1.37.
In terms of scoring, hosts have scored an average of 1.81 goals per match while conceding 0.90 goals. Across all World Cup matches played, hosts or otherwise, the average goals per match have been 1.37 both for and against.
But what has host advantage actually been worth?
Overall results for host nations in comparison to the tournament average doesn’t really tell us anything in terms of the advantage a host enjoys when playing in a home World Cup.
Yes, hosts have performed above average, but this could merely be because hosts nations have been better than average teams. This is likely the case given Brazil, Germany, Italy and France have each hosted the World Cup twice with England and Spain both having hosted the World Cup once.
To get a better sense of how hosts perform, I compared the performance of every nation that has ever hosted a World Cup with their performance in World Cups in which they were not hosts.
Below we can see the performance of each nation that has hosted a World Cup in World Cups in which they were not hosts.
Table 2: Performance of nations that have hosted World Cups when not hosting
| Nation | Matches | Ave GF | Ave GA | Ave GD | W | D | L | Ave Pts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Argentina | 74 | 1.62 | 1.19 | +0.43 | 36 | 17 | 21 | 1.69 |
| Brazil | 93 | 2.02 | 0.86 | +1.16 | 63 | 16 | 14 | 2.20 |
| Chile | 27 | 1.11 | 1.52 | -0.41 | 7 | 7 | 13 | 1.04 |
| Japan | 17 | 0.88 | 1.53 | -0.65 | 3 | 4 | 10 | 0.76 |
| South Korea | 27 | 0.96 | 2.37 | -1.41 | 3 | 7 | 17 | 0.59 |
| England | 61 | 1.26 | 0.90 | +0.36 | 22 | 24 | 15 | 1.48 |
| France | 54 | 1.59 | 1.09 | +0.50 | 25 | 13 | 16 | 1.63 |
| Germany | 91 | 1.99 | 1.07 | +0.92 | 50 | 24 | 17 | 1.91 |
| Italy | 70 | 1.40 | 0.96 | +0.44 | 31 | 24 | 15 | 1.67 |
| Mexico | 48 | 1.00 | 1.90 | -0.90 | 11 | 12 | 25 | 0.94 |
| Russia | 39 | 1.64 | 1.08 | +0.56 | 17 | 10 | 12 | 1.56 |
| South Africa | 6 | 1.33 | 1.83 | -0.50 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1.00 |
| Spain | 58 | 1.62 | 1.14 | +0.48 | 28 | 15 | 15 | 1.71 |
| Sweden | 43 | 1.42 | 1.40 | +0.02 | 14 | 13 | 16 | 1.28 |
| Switzerland | 33 | 1.18 | 1.58 | -0.39 | 10 | 9 | 14 | 1.18 |
| Uruguay | 49 | 1.39 | 1.27 | +0.12 | 19 | 14 | 16 | 1.45 |
| USA | 29 | 1.14 | 1.90 | -0.76 | 7 | 7 | 15 | 0.97 |
| Total | 819 | 1.51 | 1.24 | +0.27 | 347 | 219 | 253 | 1.54 |
Overall, nations that have hosted World Cups have earned 1.54 points per match when not hosting World Cups. This increases to 2 points per match when hosting the World Cup.
Hosts win percentage rose from 42.4% when not hosting to 58.4% when hosting.
Their draw percentage dropped from 26.7% when not hosting to 24.8% when hosting while their loss rate dropped from 30.9% to 16.8%.
In terms of scoring, hosts improved from a goal difference of +0.27 goals per match when not hosting to +0.91 when hosting.
We can then conclude that home field advantage across the entire history of the World Cup has been +0.64 goals per match, or roughly a home advantage of 23% of average total goals scored.
The table below shows the performance of each host nation as compared with their overall performance at World Cups when not hosting. For example, in 1930 Uruguay averaged +1.55 more match points per match than their average match points in World Cups they were not hosting.
Table 3: Differential in performance of nations that have hosted World Cups when not hosting
| Year | Host | Pts Diff | GD Diff |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1930 | Uruguay | +1.55 | +2.88 |
| 1934 | Italy | +0.53 | +1.16 |
| 1938 | France | -0.13 | -0.50 |
| 1950 | Brazil | -0.04 | +1.51 |
| 1954 | Switzerland | +0.32 | +0.39 |
| 1958 | Sweden | +0.89 | +0.81 |
| 1962 | Chile | +0.76 | +0.61 |
| 1966 | England | +0.86 | +0.64 |
| 1970 | Mexico | +0.81 | +1.40 |
| 1974 | Germany | +0.66 | +0.37 |
| 1978 | Argentina | +0.31 | +0.86 |
| 1982 | Spain | -0.71 | -0.68 |
| 1986 | Mexico | +1.26 | +1.70 |
| 1990 | Italy | +1.00 | +0.73 |
| 1994 | USA | +0.03 | +0.51 |
| 1998 | France | +0.80 | +1.21 |
| 2002 | East Asia | +0.94 | +1.26 |
| 2006 | Germany | +0.42 | +0.41 |
| 2010 | South Africa | +0.33 | -0.17 |
| 2014 | Brazil | -0.37 | -1.16 |
| 2018 | Russia | +0.04 | +0.24 |
In terms of goal difference, we can see that on just four occasions has the performance of a host been inferior to their performance when not hosting with two of those occurring this.
Two of these occurred this century.
In 2010 South Africa were -0.17 goals worse off as hosts (despite the vuvuzelas) while in 2014, Brazil were -1.16 inferior, with their 7-1 loss to Germany in the semi finals, doing the bulk of the damage.
We have to go back to 1982 to see the next instance, with Spain -0.68 goals worse off at home while in 1938, France were a half goal inferior at home compared to their results when playing not as hosts.
How does this compare to domestic football?
Below are the average goals for and against for home teams the last five non-covid impacted seasons across the big five leagues of Europe.
Table 4: Home advantage in big five leagues of Europe since 2017/17 (excluding 2020/21)
| League | Ave GF | Ave GA | Ave GD |
|---|---|---|---|
| England Premier League | 1.55 | 1.22 | +0.33 |
| Germany Bundesliga | 1.69 | 1.34 | +0.35 |
| Italy Serie A | 1.55 | 1.30 | +0.25 |
| Spain La Liga | 1.50 | 1.14 | +0.37 |
| France Ligue Un | 1.53 | 1.12 | +0.40 |
We can see that home advantage across the history of the World Cup has been significantly greater than current domestic home advantage.
However, home advantage has been decreasing in domestic football over recent years. Below is home advantage in English first division for each decade since 1920 (with covid years excluded).
Table 5: Home advantage in English first division by decade (excluding 2020/21)
| Decade | Home GF | Away GF | HOME GD |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1920 – 1929 | 1.94 | 1.14 | +0.8 |
| 1930 – 1939 | 2.19 | 1.3 | +0.89 |
| 1940 – 1949 | 1.79 | 1.21 | +0.58 |
| 1950 – 1959 | 2 | 1.34 | +0.66 |
| 1960 – 1969 | 1.95 | 1.3 | +0.65 |
| 1970 – 1979 | 1.55 | 1 | +0.55 |
| 1980 – 1989 | 1.59 | 1.05 | +0.54 |
| 1990 – 1999 | 1.52 | 1.09 | +0.43 |
| 2000 – 2009 | 1.5 | 1.09 | +0.41 |
| 2010 – 2019 | 1.57 | 1.18 | +0.39 |
| 2020 – 2022 | 1.51 | 1.26 | +0.26 |
| Since 1920 | 1.75 | 1.16 | +0.59 |
We can see that home advantage has steadily diminished. There are a number of theories as to why. Travel is far more comfortable for players now than what it has been in the past? Away fans are also able to travel more freely? Further, officials may now be less likely to favour home teams given the amount of media scrutiny?
Regardless, home advantage has diminished. Could we expect it to be similar in international football?
Given the small sample size, the fact that a host nation only plays 3 to 7 World Cup matches every four years, it’s difficult to determine whether or not host advantage is diminishing. However, we could expect that the comforts of travel afforded to domestic clubs would be likewise for national teams travelling to major international football tournaments. Quantifying the impact of that however is difficult across a small number of matches every four years is difficult.
Home Advantage During World Cup Qualification
The table below shows home advantage for each year of World Cup qualification matches from 2007 through to the end of qualification for the 2022 World Cup.
Table 6: Home advantage in World Cup qualification matches since 2007
| Year | Ave Home GF | Ave Away HG | Ave GD |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 | 2.28 | 1.15 | +1.13 |
| 2008 | 1.64 | 1.01 | +0.63 |
| 2009 | 1.60 | 0.97 | +0.63 |
| 2011 | 1.89 | 1.36 | +0.53 |
| 2012 | 1.62 | 1.16 | +0.47 |
| 2013 | 1.59 | 1.11 | +0.48 |
| 2015 | 1.60 | 1.30 | +0.30 |
| 2016 | 1.87 | 1.08 | +0.79 |
| 2017 | 1.54 | 1.10 | +0.44 |
| 2019 | 1.32 | 0.75 | +0.57 |
| 2020 | 1.90 | 1.45 | +0.45 |
| 2021 | 1.54 | 1.28 | +0.25 |
| 2022 | 1.51 | 0.92 | +0.59 |
| TOTAL | 1.65 | 1.14 | +0.51 |
We can see that home advantage in World Cup qualification has been significant, with an average goal difference of +0.51 goals for home teams across the 15 years of qualification, with the average goal difference being just over 18% of average match goals scored.
Home teams through qualification earned an average of 1.6 points per match, opposed to away teams who earned 1.18 points.
Betting on World Cup Host Nations
So let’s take a look at backing host nations. In this analysis I will be looking at both 1X2 and Asian handicap betting for World Cups 1998 to 2018. Odds are best odds available adjusted to standard 4.5% market commission with results determined at even stakes. I.e betting a standard 1 unit on each possible outcome.
Table 7: Performance of host nations in the 1X2 betting market
| Year | Hosts | Matches | WIN P/L | DRAW P/L | LOSS P/L |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1998 | France | 7 | +2.59 | +1.07 | -7 |
| 2002 | East Asia | 10 | +1.51 | +2.3 | -4.57 |
| 2006 | Germany | 6 | +0.94 | +0.05 | -6 |
| 2010 | South Africa | 3 | +0.53 | +0.15 | -0.58 |
| 2014 | Brazil | 6 | -1.78 | +3.72 | -3.1 |
| 2018 | Russia | 5 | -1.62 | +2.2 | -2.28 |
| Total | 37 | +2.17 | +9.49 | -23.53 | |
| ROI % | +5.86% | +25.65% | -63.59% |
The table above shows 1X2 profitability at even stakes for host nations since 1998. As we can see, it has been profitable to back host nations to both win and draw. If you had bet a unit on teams opposing host nations you would have seen a loss of just under 64%.
Betting on hosts to win in the 1X2 market would have returned a profit of just under 6% while backing them to draw would have seen a return of under 26% profit.
However it should be pointed out that the last two World Cups have seen hosts suffer losses at even stakes in the 1X2 market with Brazil in 2014 seeing a loss at even stakes of -1.78 units and Russia in 2018 -1.62 units.
France in 1998 were the best of hosts, returning a profit of +2.59 units, thanks to their World Cup title run, a run that saw them go without a defeat, culminating in a win over Brazil heading into the match odds of 3.40.
It was similar in 2002 when South Korea ran all the way to the semi finals, defeating Poland and Portugal through the group stage.
Results were similar when backing hosts in the Asian handicap market. Across 37 matches played, hosts went just over 66% against the handicap, returning a profit at even stakes of just over +27%.
Table 8: Performance of host nations in the Asian handicap betting market
| Year | Hosts | Matches | Ah WIN | Ah LOSS | Ah WIN P/L | Ah LOSS P/L |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1998 | France | 7 | 5 | 2 | +2.91 | -2.94 |
| 2002 | East Asia | 10 | 6.75 | 3.25 | +2.59 | -3.7 |
| 2006 | Germany | 6 | 4.75 | 1.25 | +3.07 | -3.54 |
| 2010 | South Africa | 3 | 1.5 | 1.5 | -0.2 | 0 |
| 2014 | Brazil | 6 | 2.75 | 3.25 | -0.67 | +0.55 |
| 2018 | Russia | 5 | 3.75 | 1.25 | +2.31 | -2.67 |
| Total | 37 | 24.5 | 12.5 | +10.01 | -12.3 | |
| ROI % | +27.05% | -33.24% |
While Russia did not return a profit in the 1X2 market in 2018, they went 3.75 against the handicap in their five matches, while in 2010 South Africa were profitable in the 1X2 market, but went 50% against the handicap in their three matches.
Conclusion: Back Qatar the 2022 World Cup
Ok, so while we can see that host nations have been profitable to back across the last six World Cups, how prepared are you to pull the pin and back Qatar this coming World Cup?
- Qatar will open the World Cup as underdogs against Ecuador, priced currently at around 3.40 to get the win and receiving half a goal in the Asian handicap market.
- The 2022 hosts will then face Senegal, a match they are currently priced at odds 3.95 to win, with the Asian handicap set again at the half goal advantage for Qatar.
- Qatar will conclude their group stage commitments against the Netherlands, a match the hosts are currently priced at odds of 5.00 to get the win, with the handicap at +1.5 goals.
While it may not appeal to your best instincts, backing Qatar at the World Cup, particularly in the Asian handicap market, may be the value play. No casual punter is going to be betting on Qatar, likely the opposite. So pinch your nose, and suck it up.
