The latest SoccerEx Football Finance 100 has been released.

The methodology they have used to decide which clubs in world football have the most financial might is as follows:

SoccerEx worked with independent academics to compile the list, which analyzed the assets of each club, their economic power for future investments and their net debts. For the 2018 rankings, SoccerEx analyzed the 2015-16 financial year.

The final rankings were compiled by assigning a weight to and adding together the following four factors: 1) Playing assets 2) Fixed assets (stadium, training centres, etc.) 3) Cash in the bank and 4) Owner’s potential investment. The club’s net debt was then subtracted from that weighted sum’

In case you were wondering, the 2015/16 accounts of clubs were used as they are the latest available for some clubs including Newcastle United, the Magpies usually releasing theirs in April, so April 2018 is when we get to see the financial figures for the 2016/17 promotion season.

Newcastle United are ranked in 36th place using those 2015/16 accounts (since then of course NUFC have spent yet another season in the Championship and are now involved in yet another relegation battle under Mike Ashley) as the basis, the breakdown below is in euros, at today’s exchange rate take away roughly 10% to get the value in pounds sterling:

€134m Players value

€88m Fixed Assets

€2m Cash in bank

€91m Owner potential investment

€120m Net debt

2018 SoccerEx Football Finance 100

  1. Manchester City
  2. Arsenal
  3. PSG
  4. Guangzhou Evergrande
  5. Tottenham
  6. Real Madrid
  7. Manchester United
  8. Juventus
  9. Chelsea
  10. Bayern Munich
  11. Zenit St Petersburg
  12. RB Leipzig
  13. Barcelona
  14. LA Galaxy
  15. Atletico Madrid
  16. Liverpool
  17. Borussia Dortmund
  18. Lyon
  19. Monaco
  20. Leicester

Other English clubs in the 100:

(27) Everton

(32) Southampton

(33) Stoke

(35) West Ham

(36) Newcastle

(55) Crystal Palace

(60) Swansea

(65) Bournemouth

(73) Burnley

(86) Sunderland

(90) Brighton

(91) Aston Villa

Interesting to see Arsenal as high as second but this is how the SoccerEx Football Finance 100 explains that:

“Manchester City, one of the most famous cases of significant foreign investment changing a club’s status and potential, top the rankings.

“Their owner’s high potential investment value is complimented by a strong performance by the club across each of the verticals.

“Arsenal’s second place in the rankings, ahead of PSG, will surprise many and is certainly a talking point in light of criticism the club receives from some quarters for its perceived lack of spending in the transfer market.

“Their ranking is a reflection of the club’s professionalism and a sound business model. The position of financial strength means Arsenal could invest significantly should the hierarchy of the club choose to change their business strategy.”

  • Paul Patterson

    Strange that we can’t compete financially with the teams below us (Mackems apart) in that list..

    • Clarko

      Spends 17/18:

      Watford €61.50m
      Swansea €50.30m
      Newcastle €49.30m
      Brighton €47.60m
      West Brom €45.70m
      West Ham €45.40m
      Huddersfield €44.40m
      Southampton €39.40m
      Crystal Palace €37.20m
      Stoke €34.90m
      Bournemouth €34.30m
      Burnley €34.04m

      Your comment is just wrong.

      (Source: Transfermarkt)

      • Angelswithdirtyfaces

        Is that net or gross ? Makes a huge difference to the bottom line

        • GToon

          He doesn’t get that aspect mate. He doesn’t understand Rafa has made a profit or the other clubs spend that much each year without having to sell to balance the books. He doesn’t understand that one club might have spent year on year and then not spent so much for one year.

          • Angelswithdirtyfaces

            Yep.. pity Clarko isn’t in business with the FCB, might see him off. Net spend is what you actually spend. Heyho

        • Clarko

          Well it doesn’t, the comment was, “we can’t compete financially with the teams below us”, clearly we can, we have spent more than 9 of the other 11 clubs.

          Comment from a previous argument:
          “Which first team player did Newcastle sell in the summer? Murphy? The outgoings at Newcastle during the summer did not weaken the squad, we didn’t sell Gray and Keane for €48.90m like Burnley, Arnautovic for €22.30m like Stoke, Nordtveit for €8.00m like West Ham, the net spend argument in relation to Newcastle is silly and actually hurts any opposing argument because the other teams in the list actually sold players, Newcastle didn’t.”

  • NUFCDan

    €91m Owner potential investment – what does this mean? Should it not be zero.

  • GToon

    Owner potential investment? Are they having a laugh! Do they not know who our owner is? Or should it read €91 without the million bit? Total joke. At least we now know why we can’t afford that Tosun bloke Everton have just bid for. You know the one Rafa apparently wanted.