SCR head-to-head
Wolves vs Hull
On current estimates, Wolverhampton Wanderers has the bigger SCR
spending allowance - by roughly £124.3m.
Spending power under SCR follows revenue - so the gap is really a revenue gap.
Side by side
Wolverhampton Wanderers
- Estimated revenue (football) reported £172m
- SCR limit - 85% of revenue £146.2m
- + Owner equity top-up (max / season) £15m
- Effective spending allowance £161.2m
- Estimated squad cost reported £162m
- Headroom −£800k
Balanced
- squad cost is 94.2% of revenue
Hull City
- Estimated revenue (football) reported £25.8m
- SCR limit - 85% of revenue £21.9m
- + Owner equity top-up (max / season) £15m
- Effective spending allowance £36.9m
- Estimated squad cost reported £47.1m
- Headroom −£10.2m
Restricted
- squad cost is 182.6% of revenue
What drives the difference
The decisive factor here is parachute payments. Wolverhampton Wanderers still receive Premier League parachute money, which inflates the football revenue that SCR is calculated on. Hull City, without it, work from a smaller base - and so a smaller 85% allowance. When the parachute payments end, that advantage narrows fast.
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 →