How Arsenal carried more of the WSL's attendance base than ever, why the league recovered only partly from last season’s dip, and what the full 2025–26 data says about growth, gaps and sustainability
I agree – Chelsea and Manchester City’s figures are probably the more concerning ones. Chelsea in particular, given the amount of success they have enjoyed on the pitch over the last six years. To still be that far behind Arsenal raises real questions.
I guess it would be a fairer comparison when they move all games to Stamford Bridge. With their success, they should be able to pull in a fanbase - although maybe because Arsenal do it all so well, new fans are more likely to gravitate to them.
Amazing breakdown, really interesting! There's a ton of data here, but something that is really striking me is how much attendance changes based on consistent access to a home venue (whether small or large) as well as access to playing hallmark games in larger stadiums.
I might have missed it in the analysis, but I wonder how the number of games being played in big capacity stadiums has fluctuated over the years? And if it went down this year (controlling for Arsenal playing all their matches in a large stadium). Asked in a more simple way... have the number of seats for WSL games increased or decreased over time, and what does controlling for that variable mean for capacity (as a percentage of filled seats, if that makes sense).
It feels like it makes the most sense for those rivalry matches to get a big stage. The North London derby not being played at the Spurs stadium feels like such a missed opportunity...
Really interesting data and insights - thank you.
As a Manchester United fan, it's their figures that capture my attention the most. I think their strategy for the women's team is currently poor.
Compare them with Arsenal - who, granted, have had a much longer runway to get to their level - and they've got serious work to do.
Maybe the Chelsea and Manchester City figures should be more concerning though - at least to their marketing department.
I agree – Chelsea and Manchester City’s figures are probably the more concerning ones. Chelsea in particular, given the amount of success they have enjoyed on the pitch over the last six years. To still be that far behind Arsenal raises real questions.
Yes, I agree.
I guess it would be a fairer comparison when they move all games to Stamford Bridge. With their success, they should be able to pull in a fanbase - although maybe because Arsenal do it all so well, new fans are more likely to gravitate to them.
Amazing breakdown, really interesting! There's a ton of data here, but something that is really striking me is how much attendance changes based on consistent access to a home venue (whether small or large) as well as access to playing hallmark games in larger stadiums.
I might have missed it in the analysis, but I wonder how the number of games being played in big capacity stadiums has fluctuated over the years? And if it went down this year (controlling for Arsenal playing all their matches in a large stadium). Asked in a more simple way... have the number of seats for WSL games increased or decreased over time, and what does controlling for that variable mean for capacity (as a percentage of filled seats, if that makes sense).
It feels like it makes the most sense for those rivalry matches to get a big stage. The North London derby not being played at the Spurs stadium feels like such a missed opportunity...