RisingTransfers

Douglas vs Dodô

Per-90 stats comparison · Rising Transfers DNA Analysis · 2025/26 season

Data Verdict

Douglas commands a higher market value (€25.0M vs €18.0M). Douglas leads in interceptions / 90 and clearances / 90. Dodô is stronger in goals / 90 and press intensity / 90. The two players are closely matched across most statistical dimensions.

Based on per-90 statistics · How we compare players →

Player A

Douglas

Defender
Brazil
€25.0M
31 years old
Small Sample
Full profile →
Player B

Dodô

Defender
Brazil
€18.0M
27 years old
Active Full-Back
Full profile →

Playing Style Profiles

Douglas

A Reading Defender. Note: this profile is based on 542 minutes of playing time this season.

Dodô

Dodô occupies a fascinating middle ground that Serie A rarely produces: a defender who creates more than he destroys, and does it at an elite level. His 1.55 key passes per 90 ranks in the league's top 10% among defenders—a number that belongs to a playmaker, not a backline operator.

Per-90 Statistics Comparison

MetricDouglasDodôEdge
Goals / 900.000.06Dodô
Tackles won / 900.54
Interceptions / 901.390.68Douglas
Clearances / 903.781.87Douglas
Press intensity / 900.522.29Dodô
Pass accuracy %79.2082.00Dodô

All statistics per 90 minutes · 2025/26 season · FULL quality DNA data only

Frequently Asked Questions

Who is the better player — Douglas or Dodô?

Douglas commands a higher market value (€25.0M vs €18.0M). Douglas leads in interceptions / 90 and clearances / 90. Dodô is stronger in goals / 90 and press intensity / 90. The two players are closely matched across most statistical dimensions.

How is this comparison calculated?

Rising Transfers compares players using per-90 statistics normalised for playing time, combined with DNA playing style vectors built from 47 performance dimensions. This ensures fair comparison regardless of team, league, or playing time. Learn more about our comparison methodology →

What are their market values?

Douglas has a market value of €25.0M, while Dodô is valued at €18.0M.

Explore More