The official team ratings are out for FIFA 23 so if you want to know who the best and worst teams are on the game you’ve come to the right place.
Does investing in a career mode with the likes of heavyweights PSG and Manchester City excite you? Or perhaps climbing the ranks with some of the worst teams on the game is the ultimate challenge for any FIFA player.
The Sporting News sorts out the best and worst teams in FIFA 23 on both the club and international scene.
*Team ratings not yet finalised but taken from FIFAIndex.com.
Top 10 club teams: Worldwide
table.tableizer-table { font-size: 14px; border: 1px solid #CCC; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; } .tableizer-table td { padding: 4px; margin: 3px; border: 1px solid #CCC; } .tableizer-table th { background-color: #FF4958; color: #FFF; font-weight: bold; }
| Rank | Team | League | Attacking | Midfield | Defending | Overall | Star Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | PSG | Ligue 1 | 89 | 82 | 84 | 85 | 5 |
| =2 | Liverpool | Premier League | 86 | 84 | 85 | 85 | 5 |
| =2 | Manchester City | Premier League | 84 | 87 | 86 | 85 | 5 |
| =4 | Bayern Munich | Bundesliga | 92 | 85 | 82 | 84 | 5 |
| =4 | Real Madrid | La Liga | 85 | 86 | 83 | 84 | 5 |
| =4 | Chelsea | Premier League | 84 | 85 | 83 | 84 | 5 |
| =7 | Atletico Madrid | La Liga | 84 | 82 | 82 | 83 | 5 |
| =7 | Barcelona | La Liga | 83 | 85 | 81 | 83 | 5 |
| =7 | Manchester United | Premier League | 82 | 83 | 81 | 83 | 5 |
| 10 | Inter Milan | Serie A | 82 | 82 | 83 | 82 | 4.5 |
Worst 10 club teams: Worldwide
table.tableizer-table { font-size: 14px; border: 1px solid #CCC; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; } .tableizer-table td { padding: 4px; margin: 3px; border: 1px solid #CCC; } .tableizer-table th { background-color: #FF4958; color: #FFF; font-weight: bold; }
| Rank | Team | League | Attacking | Midfield | Defending | Overall | Star Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Heibei FC | Chinese Super League | 52 | 52 | 53 | 53 | 0.5 |
| 2 | Longford Town | Ireland Premier Division | 55 | 54 | 53 | 54 | 0.5 |
| =3 | Guangzhou FC | Chinese Super League | 50 | 58 | 56 | 55 | 0.5 |
| =3 | Gaz Metan Medias | Romanian Liga I | 57 | 55 | 57 | 55 | 0.5 |
| 5 | Chongqing Liangjiang | Chinese Super League | 62 | 52 | 55 | 56 | 0.5 |
| =6 | Waterford | Ireland Premier Division | 56 | 57 | 57 | 57 | 0.5 |
| =6 | Qingdao FC | Chinese Super League | 57 | 56 | 59 | 57 | 0.5 |
| =6 | Drogheda United | Ireland Premier Division | 58 | 57 | 57 | 57 | 0.5 |
| =9 | Finn Harps | Ireland Premier Division | 56 | 58 | 57 | 58 | 0.5 |
| =9 | Jamshedpur FC | Indian Super League | 63 | 56 | 58 | 58 | 0.5 |
Top 10 men’s national teams
table.tableizer-table { font-size: 14px; border: 1px solid #CCC; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; } .tableizer-table td { padding: 4px; margin: 3px; border: 1px solid #CCC; } .tableizer-table th { background-color: #FF4958; color: #FFF; font-weight: bold; }
| Rank | Country | Attacking | Midfield | Defending | Overall | Star Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | France | 85 | 86 | 83 | 85 | 5 |
| =1 | Germany | 83 | 85 | 81 | 85 | 5 |
| =3 | Portugal | 85 | 83 | 85 | 84 | 5 |
| =3 | Spain | 83 | 85 | 83 | 84 | 5 |
| =5 | Argentina | 86 | 81 | 81 | 83 | 5 |
| =5 | England | 85 | 83 | 82 | 83 | 5 |
| =5 | Italy | 84 | 84 | 82 | 83 | 5 |
| =5 | Belgium | 83 | 82 | 80 | 83 | 5 |
| 9 | Netherlands | 82 | 81 | 83 | 82 | 5 |
| 10 | Brazil | 80 | 80 | 80 | 80 | 5 |
Worst 10 men’s national teams
table.tableizer-table { font-size: 14px; border: 1px solid #CCC; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; } .tableizer-table td { padding: 4px; margin: 3px; border: 1px solid #CCC; } .tableizer-table th { background-color: #FF4958; color: #FFF; font-weight: bold; }
| Rank | Country | Attacking | Midfield | Defending | Overall | Star Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | New Zealand | 69 | 67 | 69 | 68 | 2.5 |
| =2 | Iceland | 70 | 68 | 68 | 69 | 3 |
| =2 | China | 70 | 69 | 67 | 69 | 3 |
| =4 | Northern Ireland | 65 | 70 | 71 | 70 | 3 |
| =4 | Australia | 75 | 69 | 70 | 70 | 3 |
| 6 | Finland | 72 | 72 | 67 | 71 | 3.5 |
| 7 | Romania | 72 | 72 | 68 | 72 | 3.5 |
| 8 | Ireland | 69 | 73 | 74 | 73 | 3.5 |
| =9 | Greece | 72 | 75 | 73 | 73 | 3.5 |
| =9 | Hungary | 74 | 69 | 73 | 73 | 3.5 |
Top five women’s national teams
table.tableizer-table { font-size: 14px; border: 1px solid #CCC; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; } .tableizer-table td { padding: 4px; margin: 3px; border: 1px solid #CCC; } .tableizer-table th { background-color: #FF4958; color: #FFF; font-weight: bold; }
| Rank | Country | Attacking | Midfield | Defending | Overall | Star Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States | 87 | 86 | 83 | 85 | 5 |
| 2 | Germany | 82 | 85 | 81 | 83 | 5 |
| 3 | France | 85 | 78 | 82 | 82 | 4.5 |
| 4 | Netherlands | 83 | 83 | 79 | 81 | 4.5 |
| 5 | England | 82 | 79 | 82 | 80 | 4.5 |
Worst five women’s national teams
table.tableizer-table { font-size: 14px; border: 1px solid #CCC; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; } .tableizer-table td { padding: 4px; margin: 3px; border: 1px solid #CCC; } .tableizer-table th { background-color: #FF4958; color: #FFF; font-weight: bold; }
| Rank | Country | Attacking | Midfield | Defending | Overall | Star Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| =1 | Portugal | 74 | 72 | 72 | 73 | 3.5 |
| =1 | Mexico | 74 | 72 | 74 | 73 | 3.5 |
| 3 | Belgium | 77 | 73 | 73 | 74 | 3.5 |
| 4 | New Zealand | 72 | 74 | 76 | 75 | 4 |
| 5 | Scotland | 74 | 77 | 74 | 75 | 4 |