Loading…
WR Efficiency Leaderboard
The most efficient WRs by PPR per snap — points produced per opportunity.
ProxyPPR per snap, not FP per route run.tank01 doesn’t chart routes run, so we never fabricate a route denominator — offensive snaps stand in (points produced per opportunity, independent of playing time). Values run lower than per-route benchmarks; the bands are our own field.
As-of weekAs of Week 11, 2023Point-in-time: aggregates Weeks 1–11 only.
Efficiency bandsElite≥ 0.40Strong≥ 0.35Solid≥ 0.30Rotational< 0.30PPR per snap · from our 2023–25 qualified-WR field
Most efficient WRs · PPR per snap
Per-route proxy — points produced per opportunity
24 WRs
| # | Player | PPR/snap | PPR/g | Tgt% | Snaps |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |  Tyreek HillWR MIA | 0.578Elite | 25.5 | 36% | 441 |
| 2 |  CeeDee LambWR DAL | 0.392Strong | 21.5 | 26% | 548 |
| 3 |  Keenan AllenWR LAC | 0.391Strong | 23.3 | 32% | 595 |
| 4 |  Justin JeffersonWR MIN | 0.367Strong | 21.8 | 30% | 297 |
| 5 |  Mike EvansWR TB | 0.349Solid | 16.8 | — | 482 |
| 6 |  Tank DellWR HOU | 0.338Solid | 16.4 | — | 437 |
| 7 |  Stefon DiggsWR BUF | 0.335Solid | 19.0 | 32% | 623 |
| 8 |  Brandon AiyukWR SF | 0.335Solid | 16.7 | 28% | 448 |
| 9 |  Amon-Ra St. BrownWR DET | 0.331Solid | 21.3 | 32% | 581 |
| 10 |  Ja'Marr ChaseWR CIN | 0.319Solid | 19.0 | 29% | 595 |
| 11 |  A.J. BrownWR PHI | 0.317Solid | 20.5 | 32% | 647 |
| 12 |  Rashee RiceWR KC | 0.317Solid | 10.2 | — | 321 |
| 13 |  Jayden ReedWR GB | 0.311Solid | 11.7 | — | 376 |
| 14 |  DeAndre HopkinsWR TEN | 0.309Solid | 13.2 | 28% | 425 |
| 15 |  Nico CollinsWRHOU | 0.307Solid | 15.2 | — | 445 |
| 16 |  Jaylen WaddleWRMIA | 0.302Solid | 13.4 | — | 400 |
| 17 |  Mike WilliamsWRLAC | 0.301Solid | 16.7 | — | 167 |
| 18 |  Noah BrownWRHOU | 0.299Rotational | 14.2 | — | 237 |
| 19 |  Puka NacuaWR LAR | 0.296Rotational | 17.8 | 33% | 600 |
| 20 |  Kalif RaymondWRDET | 0.286Rotational | 6.0 | — | 211 |
| 21 |  Adam ThielenWR CAR | 0.277Rotational | 17.5 | 28% | 632 |
| 22 |  Kendrick BourneWR NE | 0.270Rotational | 12.5 | — | 371 |
| 23 |  DJ MooreWR CHI | 0.268Rotational | 16.5 | 29% | 680 |
| 24 |  Davante AdamsWR LV | 0.264Rotational | 14.7 | 32% | 615 |
Most efficient WRs · PPR per snap
Per-route proxy — points produced per opportunity
24 WRs
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.578Elite
- PPR per game
- 25.5
- Target share
- 36%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 441
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.392Strong
- PPR per game
- 21.5
- Target share
- 26%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 548
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.391Strong
- PPR per game
- 23.3
- Target share
- 32%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 595
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.367Strong
- PPR per game
- 21.8
- Target share
- 30%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 297
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.349Solid
- PPR per game
- 16.8
- Target share
- —
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 482
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.338Solid
- PPR per game
- 16.4
- Target share
- —
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 437
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.335Solid
- PPR per game
- 19.0
- Target share
- 32%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 623
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.335Solid
- PPR per game
- 16.7
- Target share
- 28%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 448
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.331Solid
- PPR per game
- 21.3
- Target share
- 32%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 581
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.319Solid
- PPR per game
- 19.0
- Target share
- 29%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 595
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.317Solid
- PPR per game
- 20.5
- Target share
- 32%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 647
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.317Solid
- PPR per game
- 10.2
- Target share
- —
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 321
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.311Solid
- PPR per game
- 11.7
- Target share
- —
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 376
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.309Solid
- PPR per game
- 13.2
- Target share
- 28%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 425
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.307Solid
- PPR per game
- 15.2
- Target share
- —
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 445
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.302Solid
- PPR per game
- 13.4
- Target share
- —
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 400
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.301Solid
- PPR per game
- 16.7
- Target share
- —
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 167
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.299Rotational
- PPR per game
- 14.2
- Target share
- —
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 237
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.296Rotational
- PPR per game
- 17.8
- Target share
- 33%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 600
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.286Rotational
- PPR per game
- 6.0
- Target share
- —
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 211
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.277Rotational
- PPR per game
- 17.5
- Target share
- 28%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 632
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.270Rotational
- PPR per game
- 12.5
- Target share
- —
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 371
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.268Rotational
- PPR per game
- 16.5
- Target share
- 29%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 680
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.264Rotational
- PPR per game
- 14.7
- Target share
- 32%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 615
PPR per snap is our sanctioned proxy for FP per route run. tank01 doesn’t chart routes run, so we never fabricate it — offensive snaps are the in-house denominator (per opportunity, independent of playing time). Because snaps include non-route plays, these values run lower than the per-route benchmarks @FantasyPtsData posts (Tyreek 0.85, Puka 0.75 FP/route) — different denominator, not comparable. Bands are our own 2023–25 WR distribution. Historical, descriptive — not a projection. How it works →