As the collective Game Week 2 (GW2) came to a close across the Baltics (nb. Latvia only had their GW1 during this time), there was no shortage of surprising results in all three leagues. Indeed, one would be hard pressed to pick from, for example, the heroic 3-3 comeback by Riteriai in the Vilnius derby or the completely unexpected 1-0 win by Vaprus over Flora away, in Tallinn.
This latter result, however, was the most impactful one on the Power Rankings because losing to a vastly lower-ranked opponent meant that FC Flora suffered a large coefficient penalty – enough to take them below the 1000 points mark. When the starting coefficients were allocated, we took a range of factors into the equation to determine where exactly each club should begin the 2025 season. These included league UEFA Coefficients as well as UEFA Club coefficients, among other things. Once calculated, a clear Top 4 of clubs with coefficients above 1000 emerged – RFS, Riga FC, FK Žalgiris and FC Flora. In losing to Vaprus, Flora has now left this exclusive group, finishing GW2 with 984 coefficient points. Some would (and do) argue that given Flora’s poor form of recent years, they did not deserve to be ranked in the Top 4 in the first place. In any case, we invite you to take a moment of silence for the “Big Baltic Top 4”, which is no more; and to welcome the new “Big Baltic Top 3”, which, disappointingly, now lacks Estonian representation.
Just below the top echelon, Liepāja gained a place on the back of their dominant win over Metta, while Panevėžys continue to fall, losing two places, now down to 8th. Right below them, Auda and Kauno Žalgiris are tied for 9th, both having exactly same coefficient points after losing this week (to RFS and to Džiugas, respectfully). Hegelmann, who took a bit of a tumble after last GW, recovered somewhat and are now up to 13th, sandwiched between Daugavpils and Grobiņa.
At the other end of the table, Riteriai and Harju remain where they were after GW1 despite a heroic draw by the former and a strong win by the latter. Still, both earned decent coefficient points, which will help to climb the rankings should they continue to get results.
Looking ahead to next week, positions 6-10, 18-20, 23-24 and 26-28 will likely see movement as there is barely anything to separate the teams there, especially as Daugavpils and Hegelmann may mount a challenge for the Top 10!
| Rank | Club | Power rating | |
| - | 1 | FC RFS | 1222 |
| - | 2 | Riga FC | 1100 |
| - | 3 | FK Žalgiris | 1074 |
| - | 4 | FC Flora | 994 |
| - | 5 | FCI Levadia | 845 |
| ↑ | 6 | Paide | 797 |
| ↓ | 7 | FK Liepāja | 788 |
| ↓ | 8 | FK Auda | 776 |
| ↑ | 9 | Kauno Žalgiris | 776 |
| ↓ | 10 | FK Panevėžys | 763 |
| - | 11 | FK Sūduva | 741 |
| - | 12 | BFC Daugavpils | 704 |
| - | 13 | Hegelmann FC | 698 |
| - | 14 | FK Metta | 675 |
| ↑ | 15 | FK Tukums 2000 | 652 |
| ↓ | 16 | FK Grobiņa | 635 |
| - | 17 | Narva Trans | 614 |
| - | 18 | SK Super Nova | 594 |
| ↑ | 19 | FA Šiauliai | 590 |
| ↓ | 20 | FK Banga Gargždai | 586 |
| - | 21 | Nõmme Kalju | 576 |
| ↓ | 22 | FC Džiugas Telšiai | 572 |
| - | 23 | FS Jelgava | 561 |
| ↑ | 24 | Pärnu Vaprus | 536 |
| ↓ | 25 | Tammeka Tartu | 534 |
| ↓ | 26 | DFK Dainava Alytus | 529 |
| ↑ | 27 | FK Riteriai | 527 |
| ↓ | 28 | Tallinna Kalev | 524 |
| ↑ | 29 | Harju JK | 499 |
| ↓ | 30 | FC Kuressaare | 497 |