Every Premier League Club Ranked on Net Spend Since Arne Slot’s Liverpool Appointment

Every Premier League club’s net spend since Arne Slot took the reins at Liverpool in 2024 has now been revealed. The Reds have certainly splashed the cash this season to keep the good times rolling, breaking the British transfer record twice – first by forking out £116 million for Florian Wirtz, and then £125 million for Alexander Isak. Their current shortcomings, however, are being scrutinised within an inch of their lives.
Having won the league at a canter in his maiden campaign at the Anfield helm, Slot was expected to deliver more of the same this term. Instead, they now sit eight points behind leaders Arsenal, with their recent 3-0 loss to Manchester City marking a third defeat on the spin away from home.
But when you dig into the club’s net spend, the picture becomes far more interesting, suggesting that their outgoings don’t necessarily match the sky-high expectations placed upon them. It’s easy to forget that Slot’s only signing in his first summer was Federico Chiesa for £14 million. So across two summers, the damage isn’t as dramatic as some might think – made even truer by the hefty sums coming in from players heading through the departure lounge.
23-16
With Planet Football’s study covering every team that has played in the Premier League over the past two seasons, the three relegated clubs – Ipswich Town, Southampton and Leicester City – all feature, though perhaps not as far down the list as you might expect. In fact, propping up the rest of the table is Aston Villa, who sit on a profit of £58 million as they try to keep a tight grip on their finances amid ongoing PSR issues.
Brentford’s fire-sale – which has seen Yoane Wissa, Bryan Mbeumo and Ivan Toney all head out the door – also leaves them in the black with +£27 million. Bournemouth and Crystal Palace, with +£26 million and +£22 million respectively, are punching above their weight this season, with Palace even managing to bag the FA Cup and the Community Shield within just a few short months of each other.
Leeds United, in 19th, are the best of the newly promoted sides when it comes to keeping their cheques in order, while Leicester City are the final team to record a profit. Wolves, sitting 16th, have spent £9 million over budget – but their current position at the foot of the Premier League table, winless in eleven games, suggests that money hasn’t exactly been spent wisely.
| Every Premier League club’s net spend since Arne Slot’s arrival (23-16) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rank | Club | Expenditure | Income | Net spend |
| 23. | Aston Villa | £207m | £265m | +£58m |
| 22. | Brentford | £167m | £195m | +£27m |
| 21. | Bournemouth | £232m | £259m | +£26m |
| 20. | Crystal Palace | £125m | £147m | +£22m |
| 19. | Leeds United | £124m | £145m | +£22m |
| 18. | Leicester City | £77m | £86m | +£9m |
| 17. | Southampton | £152m | £144m | -£8m |
| 16. | Wolves | £224m | £215m | -£9m |
15-11
Burnley have a net spend of –£32 million, but one of the biggest shocks in the study is Chelsea placing 14th. Despite appearing three times in the list of the most expensive transfer windows in football history, their spending spree under Todd Boehly has slowed in recent times. With £485 million brought in from player sales and £519 million reinvested, the Blues are still splashing out – just not with the same carelessness as before.
Their west London rivals, Fulham, have actually paid £10 million more in net spend. However, with an income of just £72 million, they have precious little wriggle room in the transfer market. Next up are Everton, whose –£77 million figure is largely down to the club entering a new era under fresh American ownership, while also moving into a new stadium – meaning their off-pitch expenses are probably tenfold, too.
Newcastle, in 11th, round off this section. Their mega-rich Saudi ownership has gone only £79 million over budget, meaning ten other teams have spent even more than their income suggests they have any right to. Many expected Eddie Howe’s project to be fired into superstardom, but the progression has been slow, steady, and – crucially – meaningful.
| Every Premier League club’s net spend since Arne Slot’s arrival (15-11) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rank | Club | Expenditure | Income | Net spend |
| 15. | Burnley | £155m | £122m | -£32m |
| 14. | Chelsea | £519m | £485m | -£33m |
| 13. | Fulham | £116m | £72m | -£43m |
| 12. | Everton | £152m | £75m | -£77m |
| 11. | Newcastle | £303m | £224m | -£79m |
10-6
Ipswich Town’s –£104 million spend was meant to keep them in the Premier League, but after failing to beat the drop under Kieran McKenna last term, much of that investment now feels like money down the drain. What can be said of the Tractor Boys, however, cannot be said for Sunderland, whose –£111 million outlay brought in 15 players – most of whom have helped propel them into fourth after 11 matches.
Sunderland’s expensive success story is followed by another in Nottingham Forest, with Evangelos Marinakis also dipping £111 million into his pockets to steer the Tricky Trees toward European football for the first time in two decades. That said, his trigger-happy ownership has now landed the club in a bit of a relegation scrap, having sacked Nuno Espirito Santo and then Ange Postecoglou after just 39 days. Sean Dyche is already their third manager of the season.
West Ham aren’t faring much better, still splashing the cash in the hope of returning to the glory days under David Moyes. Their –£129 million spend across two years borders on desperation as they try to claw their way back into European contention – though relegation fodder looks more likely at present. Meanwhile, Brighton’s –£132 million outlay is proving money well spent for the Seagulls, who continue to make full use of their youth academy and data-driven scouting as they cement themselves as a top-ten club.
| Every Premier League club’s net spend since Arne Slot’s arrival (10-6) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rank | Club | Expenditure | Income | Net spend |
| 10. | Ipswich Town | £179m | £76m | -£104m |
| 9. | Sunderland | £169m | £59m | -£111m |
| 8. | Nottingham Forest | £291m | £179m | -£111m |
| 7. | West Ham | £245m | £115m | -£129m |
| 6. | Brighton & Hove Albion | £307m | £173m | -£132m |
5-1
In fifth place, Manchester City have spent £201 million more in expenditure than they have brought in, signing the likes of Ryan Cherki, Gianluigi Donnarumma, and Tijjani Reijnders as part of a rebuild under Pep Guardiola. This is just £17 million less than Liverpool, whose £445 million outlay has been balanced significantly by £226 million in sales.
This means Tottenham, Manchester United, and Arsenal have all recorded a worse net spend than Liverpool over the past 24 months or so. Arsenal’s hierarchy have splashed out £343 million on new arrivals while recouping only £80 million. Whether that investment pays dividends will depend entirely on whether Mikel Arteta can deliver a Premier League or Champions League title this season.
Should he fall short, it may well be the end of the road for the Spaniard, who has yet to win any silverware in the post-COVID era. As for the Red Devils, their wasted money surprises nobody, as they continue to navigate the transfer market like a bull in a china shop. Tottenham’s –£254 million net spend mostly stems from this past summer, with the hierarchy sensing an opportunity to finally be a bit more freewheeling, as Daniel Levy’s parting gift was a deadline day move for Xavi Simons.
| Every Premier League club’s net spend since Arne Slot’s arrival (5-1) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rank | Club | Expenditure | Income | Net spend |
| 5. | Manchester City | £382m | £180m | -£201m |
| 4. | Liverpool | £445m | £226m | -£218m |
| 3. | Tottenham | £336m | £82m | -£254m |
| 2. | Manchester United | £422m | £162m | -£259m |
| 1. | Arsenal | £343m | £80m | -£262m |



