SCR head-to-head

West Brom vs Birmingham

On current estimates, Birmingham City has the bigger SCR spending allowance - by roughly £4.4m. Spending power under SCR follows revenue - so the gap is really a revenue gap.

Side by side

West Bromwich Albion

Estimated revenue (football) reported £30.4m
85% SCR limit (no owner top-up) £25.8m
Estimated squad cost reported £37.1m
Headroom vs 85% limit −£11.3m
+ Max owner equity top-up (if used) £15m
Max spending allowance (with top-up) £40.8m
Headroom vs max allowance +£3.7m

Restricted - squad cost is 122% of revenue

Birmingham City

Estimated revenue (football) reported £35.6m
85% SCR limit (no owner top-up) £30.3m
Estimated squad cost reported £38.9m
Headroom vs 85% limit −£8.6m
+ Max owner equity top-up (if used) £15m
Max spending allowance (with top-up) £45.3m
Headroom vs max allowance +£6.4m

Restricted - squad cost is 109.3% of revenue

What drives the difference

Neither club receives parachute payments, so this comparison is a cleaner read on self-generated revenue - matchday, commercial and central EFL distributions. The club with the higher allowance has simply built a larger football income.

More comparisons

Wolves vs Norwich: Premier League money vs Championship regular Burnley vs Sheffield United: parachute club vs survivor Wolves vs Hull: the parachute payment gap All Championship clubs →

Comparisons use illustrative estimates from published accounts, not official SCR submissions. SCR uses adjusted football revenue, which differs from headline turnover. Last reviewed 2026-05-17. Full rules explainer →