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 2, 2023Point-in-time: aggregates Weeks 1–2 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 |  Mike EvansWR TB | 0.477Elite | 23.9 | 28% | 100 |
| 2 |  Justin JeffersonWR MIN | 0.404Elite | 24.4 | 30% | 121 |
| 3 |  Puka NacuaWR LAR | 0.394Strong | 26.0 | 41% | 132 |
| 4 |  Nico CollinsWR HOU | 0.389Strong | 20.8 | — | 107 |
| 5 |  Josh ReynoldsWR DET | 0.349Solid | 17.8 | — | 102 |
| 6 |  CeeDee LambWR DAL | 0.339Solid | 18.5 | 26% | 109 |
| 7 |  Keenan AllenWR LAC | 0.328Solid | 22.6 | 27% | 138 |
| 8 |  Stefon DiggsWR BUF | 0.316Solid | 19.9 | 29% | 126 |
| 9 |  George PickensWR PIT | 0.307Solid | 15.7 | 26% | 102 |
| 10 |  Deebo Samuel Sr.WR SF | 0.304Solid | 16.7 | 31% | 110 |
| 11 |  Chris OlaveWR NO | 0.302Solid | 16.9 | 42% | 112 |
| 12 |  Michael Pittman Jr.WR IND | 0.296Rotational | 18.6 | 34% | 126 |
| 13 |  Amon-Ra St. BrownWRDET | 0.290Rotational | 16.6 | 28% | 115 |
| 14 |  DeVonta SmithWR PHI | 0.287Rotational | 20.4 | 29% | 142 |
| 15 |  Kendrick BourneWR NE | 0.282Rotational | 15.7 | — | 111 |
| 16 |  Tee HigginsWR CIN | 0.273Rotational | 14.4 | 28% | 106 |
| 17 |  Tyler LockettWR SEA | 0.270Rotational | 14.4 | — | 107 |
| 18 |  Calvin RidleyWR JAX | 0.266Rotational | 14.7 | 27% | 110 |
| 19 |  Tank DellWRHOU | 0.258Rotational | 13.3 | — | 103 |
| 20 |  Zay FlowersWR BAL | 0.254Rotational | 14.3 | 31% | 112 |
| 21 |  DK MetcalfWRSEA | 0.252Rotational | 13.6 | — | 108 |
| 22 |  Tutu AtwellWRLAR | 0.238Rotational | 16.6 | — | 139 |
| 23 |  Hollywood BrownWR ARI | 0.231Rotational | 13.1 | 26% | 113 |
| 24 |  Courtland SuttonWR DEN | 0.218Rotational | 12.4 | — | 114 |
Most efficient WRs · PPR per snap
Per-route proxy — points produced per opportunity
24 WRs
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.477Elite
- PPR per game
- 23.9
- Target share
- 28%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 100
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.404Elite
- PPR per game
- 24.4
- Target share
- 30%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 121
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.394Strong
- PPR per game
- 26.0
- Target share
- 41%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 132
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.389Strong
- PPR per game
- 20.8
- Target share
- —
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 107
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.349Solid
- PPR per game
- 17.8
- Target share
- —
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 102
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.339Solid
- PPR per game
- 18.5
- Target share
- 26%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 109
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.328Solid
- PPR per game
- 22.6
- Target share
- 27%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 138
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.316Solid
- PPR per game
- 19.9
- Target share
- 29%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 126
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.307Solid
- PPR per game
- 15.7
- Target share
- 26%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 102
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.304Solid
- PPR per game
- 16.7
- Target share
- 31%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 110
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.302Solid
- PPR per game
- 16.9
- Target share
- 42%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 112
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.296Rotational
- PPR per game
- 18.6
- Target share
- 34%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 126
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.290Rotational
- PPR per game
- 16.6
- Target share
- 28%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 115
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.287Rotational
- PPR per game
- 20.4
- Target share
- 29%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 142
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.282Rotational
- PPR per game
- 15.7
- Target share
- —
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 111
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.273Rotational
- PPR per game
- 14.4
- Target share
- 28%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 106
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.270Rotational
- PPR per game
- 14.4
- Target share
- —
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 107
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.266Rotational
- PPR per game
- 14.7
- Target share
- 27%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 110
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.258Rotational
- PPR per game
- 13.3
- Target share
- —
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 103
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.254Rotational
- PPR per game
- 14.3
- Target share
- 31%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 112
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.252Rotational
- PPR per game
- 13.6
- Target share
- —
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 108
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.238Rotational
- PPR per game
- 16.6
- Target share
- —
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 139
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.231Rotational
- PPR per game
- 13.1
- Target share
- 26%
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 113
- PPR per snap (per-route proxy)
- 0.218Rotational
- PPR per game
- 12.4
- Target share
- —
- Offensive snaps (volume)
- 114
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 →