Who Won The Premier League Transfer Window in Summer 2025?

Liverpool spent the most on incoming players but did they get good value? Did they sell their departees for more than they were worth?

Liverpool won the transfer window hands down. They signed the three most expensive players so how can any other side have bettered them?

This is the logic that a lot of fans would apply. Me? I don’t believe the question in the heading of this article can be answered satisfactorily. You can only establish if a move worked out once the player in question has left the club.

The collections of talent accrued this summer will inevitably move on at different times too. This doesn’t mean it isn’t fun to try to establish which Premier League team has worked the market most effectively this summer.

We’d have looked at net spend in the old days before we knew any better. It is far too simplistic, a single snapshot of a never ending player trading process. Wolves are in credit from their business this summer at the cost of diving head first into a relegation battle. They may lose far more than their recent trading profit next May.

For the Reds to have a lower net spend than Arsenal illustrates that the former is the far better seller. Per Transfermarkt, the Gunners’ second highest value sale of all time was Nicolas Anelka. He left the club in the last millennium.

There’s also the question of addressing the needs of the club when assessing the success of their transfer window. Liverpool look to be a senior forward short - unless Rio Ngumoha truly is ready to challenge Cody Gakpo - with similar concerns at the heart of the defence. Their hugely exciting transfer window was not perfect.

We need to assess the quality of the signings made. One way is to use the market value data on Transfermarkt. They use the wisdom of crowds to establish a theoretical value for every player, which means we can establish if each club has under- or over-paid for their transfers. The Reds did okay in this regard but rivals did better.

When you’re breaking transfer records it’s hard to find value. It’s notable that the figures include loan deals; without borrowing the skills of Piero Hincapié from Leverkusen, Arsenal would be on the negative side of the line. Aston Villa would be far closer to it without Harvey Elliott and Jadon Sancho popping in too. As we’re assessing 2025/26 rather than the long term future of the clubs, including loanees in the calculations feels fair enough.

The most fascinating dot on the graph represents Newcastle. They paid €288.9m for talent collectively rated at €172m, with Nick Woltemade (cost €85m, value €30m) the biggest overpay in the Premier League this summer. They should have learned that pride isn’t the most effective method for a transfer strategy at least.

Player trading is a two-way street, though. The brains trust of Transfermarkt believe Liverpool paid €25m over the odds for Alexander Isak. Indeed, speculating on the potential difference between market value now and in 2026 is partly why Ryan O’Hanlon of ESPN identified the move as one which might fail by this measure. In these financial terms alone, the deal was a win for the Magpies.

Applying this sales analysis across the division does few favours for the image of the Premier League’s business acumen. Just one of the 20 teams made more from sales than they lost in market value. Any ideas who it might be?

It was Brentford who sneaked over the line, albeit while taking a sizeable squad quality risk. Their €34.2m credit did little to overturn the collective €1.10bn deficit. Liverpool were fifth bottom for the difference between money earned and market value lost (-€87m) with Arsenal worst in class, at -€164.2m.

Trent Alexander-Arnold torpedoed the Reds here, as he represented the biggest single loss made by any English club this summer. Again, loan moves are factored in, so the ‘fee versus value’ loss departures of Elliott and Kostas Tsimikas outweigh the positive figures earned through selling the likes of Ben Doak, Darwin Núñez and Jarell Quansah.

Which club do you think was worst if we combine the above two charts. As in, who had the biggest deficit for net spend against net market value change? You can probably guess if you give it a little thought, as they’ve been run catastrophically for over a decade.

Manchester United make themselves so easy to mock. They spent €250.7m to add €198m of market value, a €52.7m loss in these terms. The €74.2m they earned from waving goodbye to €216.8m of ‘talent’ sums up their years of mismanagement succinctly.

It’s only fair to acknowledge that Liverpool were one of the worst teams on this latest chart too, for already discussed reasons. The manager’s requirements are a hugely vital factor, though. The Reds reinvigorated their squad while selling several players whom Arne Slot was unlikely to start too often. The quality of the signings and departures can render the finances of the trading less important.

Quantifying this is not easy. You could look at the goal contributions that attackers bring but how do you measure defenders? One method is to use MBAPPE ratings, which are “an all-in-one metric, built to estimate a player’s impact on non-penalty goal differential per 90 minutes.” Liverpool made three of the top five Premier League signings this summer based on all players’ 2024/25 scores.

Looking further down the scores, the Reds purchased two of the top seven full-backs, with Jeremie Frimpong the leader on his side of the field. They lost good men too, but it’s hard to quibble with the signings.

So, did Liverpool win the transfer window? Who cares. They made a serious statement of intent financially while buying very well. That will more than do for now.