Crystal Palace's squad cost ratio: a squad costing about as much as its countable revenue, and two answers to one transfer

Correction, 23 September 2026. The ratio is 73.2% and 94.1% before player trading, from 74.2% and 95.4%, after the series-wide fee sweep and a revised amortisation figure. The population has since been reconciled against the Premier League’s own squad returns, so the figures are no longer marked pending. An earlier version published on 13 September reported 63.9% and 81.6%; that was an incompleteness failure rather than an estimation one, and the rebuild that corrected it stands.

Correction, 25 September 2026. Four academy departures from summer 2026 had been carried on unsourced placeholder figures, and two more were missing. Joe Whitworth was estimated as a £1.5m sale to Wigan, but he left on a free transfer, so that profit is removed. Tayo Adaramola’s move to Cercle Brugge (about £0.5m) and Mofe Jemide’s to Alverca (about £0.25m up front) are added. Justin Devenny’s sale to Stoke and Danny Imray’s to Wrexham move from placeholder estimates of £3.0m and £1.5m to reported fees of about £5m each. The removed Whitworth profit on its own would have pushed the ratio up slightly; the better-sourced Devenny and Imray fees more than offset it. Together, 2026/27’s sale profit rises from £56.1m to £60.6m and the three-year average from £64.6m to £66.1m, and the ratio moves from 73.2% to 72.8%, or from 74.7% to 74.3% if Osorio is capitalised. David Ozoh’s fee remains an estimate. The comparison with Everton also now uses Everton’s current figures.

Palace’s transfer record was then rebuilt from the club’s own announcements and the buying clubs’ records, which corrected several details without changing the headline figure, which stays at 72.8%. Three departures had not been recorded: Odsonne Édouard’s sale to Lens for £4.0m on 1 September 2025, Malcolm Ebiowei’s to Blackpool for £1.0m, and Ademola Ola-Adebomi’s free transfer to WSG Tirol. Naouirou Ahamada, carried as a £4.0m sale, left for Auxerre on a free transfer, and Luke Browne’s fee to Notts County was nominal, so both are now at nil. Nine sales are dated from their completions, among them David Ozoh’s and Justin Devenny’s, which completed on deadline day, 1 September, and were announced after midnight. The Édouard and Ahamada corrections largely offset each other. Together 2025/26’s sale profit is £71.8m and 2026/27’s £60.3m, the squad cost £212.2m, and Brennan Johnson’s sale, now dated 11 August, is a £9.2m loss.

Update, 27 September 2026. Palace’s squad cost ratio is unchanged. Two figures are brought up to date: without the revenue the rule adds, the same cost base produces 109.5% rather than 109.6%, which is the engine’s exact figure where the earlier one had been computed by hand; and Everton’s figures in the comparison below reflect Everton’s correction of 25 September.

Corrections, 1 and 2 October 2026. The ratio is 73.6%, from 72.8%, and 94.5% before player trading, from 94.1%; if Osorio is capitalised, 75.2% and 96.5%. Agents’ fees now use the FA’s published figure for Palace, £16.8m, rather than an assumed £15m. Brennan Johnson’s arrival is dated 2 January 2026, when it was announced, which lowers the loss on his August sale. Queens Park Rangers’ 20% sell-on on Eberechi Eze is now deducted, taken on Palace’s profit at £8.8m, with Eze’s cost at the £16m paid up front; on the whole fee it would be £12.0m and the ratio 73.9%. The costs, terms and dates of Lacroix, Muñoz, Ahamada, Guéhi and Ozoh now follow reports and the club’s announcements. Chelsea are owed a sell-on on Guéhi’s sale to Manchester City, but its size has not been reported, so nothing is deducted for it. No fee was published for Dwight McNeil, who came the other way in the Johnson exchange; at the £21.7m Everton’s side implies, the ratio would be 73.8%. The three-year average of sale profit is £64.0m; green headroom is £32.9m, or £28.5m with Osorio capitalised; the range is 70.1% to 77.2% and the stress case 87.0%. The conclusion does not change: Palace sit inside the green threshold on either treatment of Osorio, no modelled draw crosses 85%, and the stress case remains above it.

Correction, 3 October 2026. The ratio is 74.9%, from 73.6%, and 96.6% before player trading, from 94.5%. Counted, from archived match reports. The rule divides last season’s receipts by last season’s home matches. Palace played 28 (19 league, one cup and eight European), where we had assumed 24. Re-estimated, by our method. Last season’s matchday receipts are not yet filed. We had carried £21.0m; the estimate is now £19.0m: the filed 2024/25 figure of £16.6m, scaled for the change in home matches (cup ties from 3 to 1 and European matches from 0 to 8), with a cup tie counted as 0.15 of a league match and a European match as 0.25, plus 5% for the year. The method, and how far it could be out, is set out in How we estimate matchday revenue. Matchday revenue under the rule is £17.0m, from £21.9m. Also moved: the range is 71.3 to 78.6%, from 70.1 to 77.2%; green headroom is £28.8m, from £32.9m; and the stress case is 88.5%, from 87.0%. A separate review of agents’ fees on signings since the last accounts is under way and may raise this figure; we will report its result.

Correction, 3 October 2026 (second of the day). The ratio is 75.2%, not the 74.9% we published earlier today, and 97.1% before player trading, not 96.6%. The earlier figure was wrong. Our estimate of last season’s matchday receipts starts from the gate receipts in Palace’s 2024/25 accounts, and we had copied that figure wrongly: the accounts print £15.6m, and our record of the club held £16.6m. The error was made when the record was first built and was found when the accounts were read again, page by page, for a separate review. On the right figure the estimate of last season’s receipts is £17.9m, not £19.0m, and matchday revenue under the rule is £15.9m, not £17.0m. Also moved: the range is 71.5 to 78.9%, from 71.3 to 78.6%; green headroom is £27.9m, from £28.8m; and the stress case is 88.9%, from 88.5%. We have since read all thirteen filed matchday figures behind the earlier update against their pages, and from now on a filed figure that an update newly depends on is read against its page first. A separate review of agents’ fees on signings since the last accounts is under way and may raise this figure; we will report its result.

Correction, 4 October 2026. The ratio is 78.0%, from 75.2%, and 100.5% before player trading, from 97.1%. The squad cost rule defines three things in its own terms, and in each we had used the figure from a club’s accounts (Three definitions in the squad cost rule, and what they change). What a registration costs. The rule counts everything a club pays in connection with a transfer: the fee, the League’s 4% transfer levy and agents’ fees. For players signed since Palace’s last accounts we now count the reported fee plus 12%. Squad cost is £216.0m, from £213.3m, and the three-year average of sale profit is £61.9m, from £64.0m, because a player sold now leaves at a higher book value. This is the result of the review of agents’ fees that our earlier notes promised. Merchandise. The rule counts merchandise at gross profit, sales less the cost of the goods, where we had counted sales in full. Palace’s accounts give no merchandise figure, so we estimate the cost of the goods from the clubs that do: £2.4m, in a range of £1.0m to £5.2m. Cup prize money. The rule counts a three-year average of what a club received from the FA Cup and the EFL Cup. We had entered £4.0m for Palace, a figure with no calculation behind it. Rebuilt from Palace’s cup ties in the last three seasons and the FA’s published prize fund and broadcast fees, it is £1.5m, in a range of £1.4m to £7.2m. The figure is provisional: the EFL publishes no prize money, some broadcast fees are not published, and the top of the range allows for a share of the gate at away ties, which the rule may or may not count. The revenue the rule counts is £214.9m, from £219.7m. Also moved: the range is 73.8 to 81.4%, from 71.5 to 78.9%; green headroom is £19.2m, from £27.9m; the stress case is 92.0%, from 88.9%.

Correction, 5 October 2026. The ratio is 78.5%, from 78.0%, and 101.2% before player trading, from 100.5%. We now measure each contract from the day the player was registered to the day it ends. A player who signs in August on a five-year deal has a contract of four years and ten months, because contracts end on 30 June; we had spread his cost over five full years. 14 of Crystal Palace’s contract lengths change, 12 of them against an end date we have derived as the 30 June the announced length points to, where no source states the date. The yearly charge for registrations is £79.2m, from £77.7m. The range is 74.2% to 81.8%, from 73.8% to 81.4%. About 1% of our modelled outcomes are above the 85% line, from 1%. No threshold is crossed. The contract that Darío Osorio’s obligation would create is now measured in the same way: in that what-if the ratio is 80.3%, from 79.9%, and the ratio before player trading is 103.6%, from 102.9%. Most clubs move because contract costs are now measured to their actual or derived expiry dates; six also move for club-specific reasons. See the engine changelog.

Correction, 7 October 2026. The ratio is 78.9%, from 78.5%, and 101.8% before player trading, from 101.2%. Borna Sosa’s fee is a reported £3m, where we had none. The figure is from a press report; the club did not publish one. Six signing dates now follow the club’s own announcements (Sosa, Yeremy Pino, Jaydee Canvot, Jorgen Strand Larsen, Oscar Mingueza and Takehiro Tomiyasu), and Mingueza’s contract is four years, as the club announced, where we had three. The yearly charge for registrations is £80.4m, from £79.2m. The range is 74.7% to 82.3%, from 74.2% to 81.8%. In the what-if in which Darío Osorio’s obligation is capitalised, the ratio is 80.8%, from 80.3%, and 104.2% before player trading, from 103.6%. No threshold is crossed. See the engine changelog.

Correction, 9 October 2026. The ratio is 78.1%, from 78.9%, and 100.4% before player trading, from 101.8%. Last season’s commercial revenue is now estimated by one published method, the same for every club. Palace’s 2025/26 accounts are not filed, so the figure is an estimate. We had £33.0m, a judgement of ours. It is now £36.1m: the £30.7m filed for 2024/25, grown by 17.4%, the rate the method gives a commercial income of that size (how we estimate last season’s commercial revenue). It is drawn between £22.6m and £54.7m, where we had drawn 7% either way: the new span comes from how far forecasts of this kind have missed in past seasons. The range is 72.8% to 81.5%, from 74.7% to 82.3%. The published ratio crosses no threshold. The stress case is now described as what it is: the worst case on costs alone, with revenue held at the central estimate. See the engine changelog.

Clarification, 15 October 2026. Wording only; no figure changed. The ranges in this article are assumption ranges, the spread of the model’s inputs between assumed bounds, not calibrated or confidence intervals, and the shares of modelled outcomes above or below a threshold quoted in the notes above are withdrawn.

Update, 15 October 2026, second correction of the day. Palace’s own figures are unchanged. The comparison with Everton below uses Everton’s corrected figures (the engine changelog): Everton are 84.9% before player trading, from 84.4%, so the two clubs are 15.5 points apart before trading, from 16.0, and Everton receive 14.1 points of combined support, from 13.6.

Updated 16 October 2026: loans out now recorded; wage relief shown in ranges. The central figure is unchanged at 78.1%. Crystal Palace’s players out on loan are now recorded. Nobody has said how much of their wages the borrowing clubs pay, so the possible saving widens the assumption range rather than moving the central figure: the range is 71.5% to 80.6%, from 72.8% to 81.5%, still wholly below 85%. The stress case, the worst case on costs alone, is 92.8%, from 91.9%. See the engine changelog.

Correction, 21 October 2026. The ratio is 77.8%, from 78.1%, and 100.0% before player trading, from 100.4%; the assumption range is 71.2% to 80.3%, from 71.5% to 80.6%. Two signing dates now follow Crystal Palace’s own completion announcements: Zavier Gozo on 18 August 2026, not 20 August, and Anan Khalaili on 15 August, not 10 August. Quinten Timber’s contract runs to 2031, as the club announced, not 2030, so his fee is spread over one more season. Before player trading the squad now costs just under the countable revenue, where it had cost slightly more. The capitalised Osorio branch is 79.6%, from 79.9%, and the stress case 92.5%, from 92.8%. The comparison with Everton uses Everton’s corrected figures (73.3% and 84.8% before player trading). See the engine changelog.

Correction, 23 October 2026. Some figures in this article had not been brought up to date when earlier corrections moved them, and are now. Palace’s ratio, 77.8%, and its figure before player trading, 100.0%, are unchanged.

• Palace: green headroom is £20.3m, not £19.5m, and £15.1m with Osorio capitalised, not £14.3m; amortisation is £79.5m, not £80.4m; the stress case is 92.5%, not 92.8%.
• Everton, compared: after Everton’s correction of 23 October, which counted the profit on player sales over the six transfer windows the rule names (Rule A.1.53), Everton’s ratio is 72.3%, not 73.3%, player trading is worth 12.5 points, not 11.5, and Everton’s combined support is 15.1 points, not 14.1. The two clubs’ published figures are 5.5 points apart, not 4.5 (the heading said 4.6).
• See the engine changelog.

Correction, 24 October 2026. No figure changed. The section on player trading described the sale-profit average as three financial years. The rule takes the profit or loss on sales in the six most recent transfer windows and divides it by three (Rules A.1.13 and A.1.53). For the March 2027 test that period starts on 2 February 2024. Palace made no sale carrying value between then and the start of their 2024/25 year, so the three financial years in the table are the whole of it and the figure is unchanged. The section now says so.

Correction, 25 October 2026. The ratio, 77.8%, is unchanged. The summary at the end said Palace and Everton are 15.5 points apart before player trading. They are 15.2 points apart (Palace 100.0%, Everton 84.8%), as the comparison section says: the corrections of 21 and 23 October changed the gap and missed this sentence, which now also gives the gap after trading, 5.5 points, where it said about five. Two other statements are corrected. The opening list said the Europa League amount replaces Palace’s Conference League money because the rule treats the two as separate competitions; the reason is the one the section on revenue gives, that the rule counts the competition a club has qualified for this season (Rule A.1.29(e)). And Brennan Johnson’s £21.7m was said not to cover seven months of amortisation; it fell £12.2m short of what was left of his fee on Palace’s books after seven months of amortisation, which is the loss the article gives.

Correction, 26 October 2026. The ratio is 78.1%, from 77.8%, and 100.4% before player trading, from 100.0%. The fee Palace paid Lens for Pierre Sage now counts. A fee one club pays another for a head coach is part of the squad cost, spread over his contract (Rule A.1.22(d)); compensation a club receives for releasing one counts with the profit on player sales (Rule A.1.29(g)). We had counted neither. The fee is €3m guaranteed as reported in June 2026, £2.6m, and up to €5m, £4.3m; on a three-year contract that is £0.9m a year in the central figure and up to £1.4m in the range. It is not yet in filed accounts. The squad cost is £218.7m, from £217.9m, now just above the revenue the rule counts, £217.9m, where the two were level; without that revenue the ratio is 116.9%, from 116.4%; the headroom is £19.4m, from £20.3m; the range is 71.5% to 80.7%, from 71.2% to 80.3%; the stress case 93.0%, from 92.5%. With Osorio capitalised the ratio is 79.9%, from 79.6%, 102.7% before player trading, from 102.3%, and the headroom £14.3m, from £15.1m. Palace and Everton are 5.8 percentage points apart, from 5.5, and 15.6 before player trading, from 15.2; the combined support is 38.8 points, from 38.7.

Correction, 28 October 2026. The ratio is 78.2%, from 78.1%; 100.4% before player trading is unchanged. We checked every transfer in our records against published sources and corrected sixteen entries at eleven clubs where the club’s announcement or a reputable report, read on the page, gives a different fee, contract length or date. Daniel Munoz’s sale to Nottingham Forest brought £20m guaranteed, not £22m. The other £2m is add-ons, which count with the profit on player sales only once they fall due (Rule A.1.29(g)). The three-year average of sale profit is £61.6m, from £62.3m, and 2026/27’s sales £53.4m so far, from £55.3m; player trading is worth 22.1 points, from 22.3. The headroom is £18.9m, from £19.4m; the range is 71.7% to 80.9%, from 71.5% to 80.7%; the stress case 93.2%, from 93.0%. With Osorio capitalised the ratio is 80.1%, from 79.9%, and the headroom £13.7m, from £14.3m. Palace and Everton are 5.9 percentage points apart, from 5.8.

Correction, 31 October 2026. The comparison with Everton moves with Everton’s corrected figures: Everton are at 72.5%, from 72.3%, and 85.0% before player trading, from 84.8%, so the two clubs are 5.8 percentage points apart, from 5.9, and 15.4 before trading, from 15.6, with Everton’s combined support 15.2 points, from 15.1. The twenty clubs together come to 75.3%, from 75.1%, because Chelsea’s and Liverpool’s filed sale profit replaces our modelled figures and 19 transfer entries are corrected across the league. Palace’s own ratio, 78.2%, is unchanged. Figures that follow from these are restated with them in the text. The correction does not reverse the article’s conclusion.

Correction, 1 November 2026. Palace’s ratio is unchanged at 78.2%. The article said no club in the sample discloses its players’ wage bill. Palace’s accounts print player wage costs of £110.8m for 2024/25. The article now gives the figure and what it does and does not show for the 74 to 82% range. The sale-profit table kept figures from before 28 October: 2026/27 is £53.4m, from £55.3m, and the three-year average £61.6m, from £62.3m, as the calculation beneath it already said. Daniel Muñoz is at a £20m base, from £22m. The list of what makes up the squad cost left out about £0.9m for the fee paid for the head coach. The opening’s sequence said 78.1%; it is 78.2%. The heading said Palace and Everton are 5.9 points apart; it is 5.8. If the clause on Eze runs on the whole fee the ratio is 78.5%, from 78.4%. The label “revenue added by the rule” and the wording of revenue the rule supplies are replaced, and the article now separates merit from the European amounts. The article said Palace made no sale carrying value in February to June 2024; it now says we found no sale with a profit or loss. The test for a conditional obligation is attributed to UEFA. The Osorio section said only Wikipedia and an aggregator called the deal an option; Palace’s own announcement does, and Midtjylland’s says obligation. The five-year term behind the capitalised case is marked as our assumption. The sources now list Rules A.1.22(d), A.1.29(g) and A.1.53. Two repeating sections, on the squad lists and on what the article says, are removed; the squad-list check stays in the sources.

Correction, 2 November 2026. The note that recorded Borna Sosa’s reported £3m fee named the outlet that reported it. It is not a source this publication cites, so the note now describes the source without the name. No figure changes.

Correction, 3 November 2026. The ratio is 79.3%, from 78.2%, in a range of 72.7% to 81.9%, from 71.7% to 80.9%, and 101.7% before player trading, from 100.4%. Anan Khalaili’s fee is the reported £21.0m, where we had £8.0m with no source. Palace now sit just above Brighton in the ranking.