Best TFT Comps by Placement
This table ranks TFT Set 16 team compositions by their average placement finish, showing which comps consistently achieve top placements. Top 9-champion Set 16 compositions: Blacksmith/Bruiser (81.2% top 4, 2.73 avg place, 1,026 games); Riftscourge/Bruiser (80.9% top 4, 2.80 avg place, 1,724 games); Bruiser/Gunslinger (83.6% top 4, 2.87 avg place, 1,589 games). Blacksmith/Bruiser leads with a 81.2% top-4 rate and 2.73 average placement. Riftscourge/Bruiser follows at 80.9%. Analyzing 55 9-comp compositions with real-time performance statistics.
Primary | Champions | Avg | Top 4 | First | Contested | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Avg Place 2.00 | Top 4 90.67% | First Place 45.33% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 2.37 | Top 4 93.19% | First Place 23.47% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 2.43 | Top 4 86.00% | First Place 38.51% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 2.43 | Top 4 89.84% | First Place 30.90% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 2.54 | Top 4 91.30% | First Place 31.88% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 2.54 | Top 4 89.70% | First Place 29.09% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 2.55 | Top 4 82.61% | First Place 31.88% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 2.56 | Top 4 91.88% | First Place 24.35% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 2.73 | Top 4 81.19% | First Place 34.02% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 2.80 | Top 4 80.92% | First Place 33.06% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 2.87 | Top 4 83.57% | First Place 22.91% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 2.90 | Top 4 78.85% | First Place 31.07% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 2.92 | Top 4 78.50% | First Place 31.06% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 2.97 | Top 4 79.39% | First Place 27.43% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 2.98 | Top 4 77.21% | First Place 33.46% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.00 | Top 4 77.43% | First Place 26.57% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.01 | Top 4 76.88% | First Place 30.40% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.01 | Top 4 78.82% | First Place 25.12% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.01 | Top 4 80.71% | First Place 22.55% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.01 | Top 4 77.17% | First Place 31.08% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.04 | Top 4 77.18% | First Place 27.51% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.05 | Top 4 86.36% | First Place 22.73% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.10 | Top 4 78.61% | First Place 22.08% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.12 | Top 4 73.65% | First Place 30.39% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.15 | Top 4 74.29% | First Place 26.33% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.23 | Top 4 76.36% | First Place 20.00% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.24 | Top 4 73.67% | First Place 27.56% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.25 | Top 4 72.32% | First Place 24.40% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.26 | Top 4 73.06% | First Place 23.94% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.29 | Top 4 71.79% | First Place 18.75% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.30 | Top 4 72.88% | First Place 22.99% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.33 | Top 4 75.99% | First Place 21.11% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.35 | Top 4 71.15% | First Place 25.52% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.36 | Top 4 71.90% | First Place 22.77% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.37 | Top 4 71.85% | First Place 22.52% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.39 | Top 4 78.12% | First Place 12.46% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.41 | Top 4 73.19% | First Place 16.53% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.41 | Top 4 71.15% | First Place 15.38% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.42 | Top 4 74.27% | First Place 19.69% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.43 | Top 4 71.58% | First Place 20.00% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.45 | Top 4 72.73% | First Place 13.64% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.51 | Top 4 71.91% | First Place 15.30% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.52 | Top 4 72.30% | First Place 11.95% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.59 | Top 4 68.62% | First Place 15.99% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 3.96 | Top 4 59.66% | First Place 15.87% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 4.03 | Top 4 62.42% | First Place 10.09% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 4.12 | Top 4 58.39% | First Place 11.19% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 4.36 | Top 4 50.27% | First Place 7.47% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 4.49 | Top 4 45.89% | First Place 5.70% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 4.51 | Top 4 50.52% | First Place 7.22% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 4.63 | Top 4 48.77% | First Place 6.13% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 4.65 | Top 4 45.05% | First Place 3.07% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 4.95 | Top 4 36.71% | First Place 5.70% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 5.52 | Top 4 28.16% | First Place 4.21% | Low Contested Risk | |||
Avg Place 5.54 | Top 4 37.50% | First Place 4.17% | Low Contested Risk | |||
The Best Comps, Right in Your Game
The Recommended Comps overlay shows the strongest meta comps matched to the traits and units you're already running — with win rate, average placement, and 1st-place odds — without ever leaving TFT.
- Meta comps without alt-tabbing
- Matched to your current traits
- Win rate, avg place & 1st odds
Help us maintain accuracy! If you notice incorrect stats, missing data, or any issues, your feedback directly improves the quality of our data for the entire community.
TFT Set 16 Comps FAQ
What is the best TFT comp in TFT Set 16?
The best TFT comp in TFT Set 16 is Defender/Disruptor with Zoe as the primary carry, finishing top 4 in 93.2% of games with a 2.37 average placement. That consistency is what climbs ranked.
How do I play the Defender/Disruptor comp?
To play Defender/Disruptor, focus on building around Zoe as your main carry. Look for Zoe and supporting units early, prioritize items that synergize with your carry, and aim to hit your power spike by level 7-8. This comp has a 0.1% pick rate, making it a relatively uncontested option.
What comps are good for climbing in TFT Set 16?
For consistent LP gains in TFT Set 16, Bruiser/Defender offers the best average placement at 2.00. Other reliable options include Defender/Disruptor (2.37 avg) and Star Forger/Defender (2.43 avg). Consistent comps minimize bottom 4 finishes and provide steady climbing.
What is the easiest TFT comp to play?
Defender/Disruptor is a good pick for an easier climb: it finishes top 4 in 93.2% of games but only 0.1% of players pick it, so you are unlikely to be contested and can find your units without forced pivots.
When should I force a comp vs flex in TFT Set 16?
In TFT Set 16, Blacksmith/Harvester has a 1.0% pick rate, meaning it's heavily contested. If you see others going for it, consider flexing into alternatives like Defender/Disruptor. Force a comp when you hit early units and items, or when it's uncontested. Flex when you see 2+ players competing for the same units.
What is the most consistent TFT comp in TFT Set 16?
Bruiser/Defender has the best average placement at 2.00, making it the most consistent comp for climbing. Defender/Disruptor follows at 2.37, and Star Forger/Defender at 2.43. Lower average placement means fewer bottom 4 finishes.
Is average placement better than win rate for climbing?
For consistent LP gains, average placement is often more reliable than pure win rate. A comp like Bruiser/Defender with 2.00 average placement minimizes big LP losses from bottom 4 finishes. High variance comps might win more lobbies but also 8th more often. For climbing, consistency usually beats coinflip strategies.