World Cup stadium rankings: Which venue is best for atmosphere, location and suitability for soccer?

There are 16 stadiums staging matches at the 2026 World Cup across three countries, with 11 in the United States, three in Mexico and two in Canada. But which of them is the best?

We asked our writers, who are visiting all of these venues during the tournament, to rate them on a series of criteria: matchday experience, match atmosphere, transport and location, aesthetics, and suitability for soccer/football.

Here are the results, explaining which venues came out with the highest totals, and which were not quite up to scratch compared to the others…

Get free access to the most comprehensive World Cup coverage in The Athletic app

16. MetLife Stadium

There has been lots of criticism of FIFA’s decision to choose MetLife Stadium in New Jersey, a few miles west of New York City, as the venue for next month’s World Cup final, and I can see why.

When the Jets or the Giants are playing NFL games here, transport isn’t too much of an issue, as there are well over 20,000 car parking spaces available — a number vastly reduced due to FIFA’s security perimeter, while the cost of public transport from Manhattan during this tournament has been hiked to almost $100.

From the outside, it looks awful; think of a spaceship designed with zero creativity then dumped in the middle of a parking lot. But from the inside, it is a decent stadium; the bowl shape means there isn’t a bad seat in the house — even if you can only afford a seat at the back of the top tier.

It loses points for being an isolated venue. It is in an area that you visit for the game and nothing else. And the catering options are just whatever ordinary, overpriced food is being sold on the concourses.

Is it suitable for soccer? Yes. The atmosphere of the games I have attended there has been superb. Should it be hosting a World Cup final? Not for me.

Ratings

• Matchday experience: 7/10
• Match atmosphere 9/10
• Transport and location 3/10
• Aesthetics 4/10
• Suitability for soccer/football 7/10

Total: 30/50

Ed Mackey

=13. AT&T Stadium

(Alex Pantling – FIFA/FIFA via Getty Images)

Dallas Stadium, as FIFA has re-named it for the tournament, isn’t really called Dallas Stadium, which is apt as it isn’t actually in Dallas. That’s the main sticking point here: the location of Arlington, closer to the neighbouring city of Fort Worth than to Dallas itself, creates something of a logistical challenge for supporters. 

That said, the transport situation worked relatively smoothly for its opening game, Japan and the Netherlands drawing 2-2. Many fans turned up fully three hours before kick-off, and there was a tremendous atmosphere both outside the stadium and inside it, with opposing supporters mingling.

The issue with the location is more about the knock-on impact. Fans are staying all over the place: some in Dallas, some in Fort Worth, some near the airport, and therefore the centre of Dallas has hardly been taken over by World Cup fever, as happens in cities when the stadium is more centrally located. 

Once you’re inside, though, it’s a tremendous experience. The big screen is so striking that it’s difficult not to watch play on that rather than look further down at the live action. Architecturally, this isn’t a boring symmetrical bowl; it contains all sorts of unusual features — you almost notice a new section every time you glance around. 

The stadium has more matches than anywhere else at this tournament, nine, and there was speculation it might be awarded the final. But though it is suitable for a World Cup final, the location is, in a soccer context, not quite right.

Ratings

• Matchday experience: 7/10
• Match atmosphere: 7/10
• Transport and location: 3/10
• Aesthetics: 9/10
• Suitability for soccer/football: 8/10

Total: 34/50

Michael Cox

=13. Levi’s Stadium

(Richard Heathcote/Getty Images)

The loftiest seats in Levi’s Stadium’s fourth tier are 200ft (61m) above ground level — twice the height of the Statue of Liberty (not including the base, that is). Who needs a ride in California’s Great America theme park next door when you have your own thrill just peering down at the pitch from way up there? 

Looking out from behind one of its 176 glass-fronted private suites on the opposite side is an otherworldly experience. It’s like gazing out of a gigantic spaceship, and the players below look like matchsticks. In the home of the NFL’s 49ers, the proportions inside this structure, consisting of 75,000 tonnes of steel, are epic. 

Wide concourses allow fans to move freely before the game but also provide much-needed shade, as they did in Saturday’s 1-1 draw between Qatar and Switzerland, from the punishing California sunshine. Completely exposed to the elements, the stadium’s open-air setup is a blessing and a curse. The media are housed indoors and being sheltered from such extreme temperatures is advantageous, but behind the glass, all your senses are muffled, and being so high up, you cannot feed off the players’ and coaches’ body language.

In the heart of Silicon Valley, surrounded by highways and tech companies, most fans drive here or use the CalTrain to travel down from San Francisco. If you are arriving within one hour before kick-off, good luck, because the traffic can get heavy.

There is a buzzy pre- and post-match vibe at Clara’s Junction, serving up chicken wings and BBQ ribs. But the best way to access the stadium during the World Cup is to walk or cycle along the peaceful San Tomas Aquino Creek trail, a place of serenity before the drama unfolds. 

Ratings

• Matchday experience: 7/10
• Match atmosphere: 8/10
• Transport and location: 5/10
• Aesthetics: 7/10
• Suitability for soccer/football: 7/10

Total: 34/50

Charlotte Harpur

=13. Hard Rock Stadium

(Molly Darlington/Getty Images)

Once you get to the place, which is a difficult task in itself, you are in for a treat. It has a modern feel to it; the concourses are clean and full of different food and drink options, but, as we are seeing across several stadiums in this World Cup, buying refreshments can be costly.

Although the media sit behind a glass screen in an air-conditioned room, from a previous trip of mine to Hard Rock for an NFL game between the Miami Dolphins and Buffalo Bills, the South Florida humidity is a factor and can make for quite uncomfortable viewing.  

As for the atmosphere, the draw between Saudi Arabia and Uruguay was largely subdued, but you would expect it to be an entirely different story when Portugal play Colombia and Brazil meet Scotland in further group matches here over the next few days.

Miami is not known for its public-transport options, which can make getting to and from Hard Rock unnecessarily stressful. However, for the seven World Cup matches being hosted there, ticket holders can take advantage of a free shuttle service from four hubs in the city. 

This seemed to run relatively smoothly for Hard Rock’s opening game, which hopefully bodes well for the rest of the tournament. Otherwise, the matchday experience will quickly plummet.

Ratings

• Matchday experience: 7/10
• Match atmosphere: 8/10
• Transport and location: 3/10
• Aesthetics: 8/10
• Suitability for soccer/football: 8/10

Total: 34/50

Dan Sheldon

12. Estadio Akron

(Lars Baron/Getty Images)

Built to resemble a volcano and boasting a futuristic crater-esque ring as a roof, Guadalajara’s Estadio Akron is one of the most unique-looking venues at the tournament — and its atmosphere is liable to explode when Mexico play their second group-stage game against South Korea later today (Thursday). 

Dutch football legend Johan Cruyff was responsible for introducing its grass pitch in 2012 — he was working as a sporting adviser to hometown team C.D. Guadalajara, also known as Chivas, who are notable for only selecting Mexican players. 

Guadalajara bills itself as being “the most Mexican” of the nation’s three host cities at this tournament, and the joy was unbridled during the World Cup’s second game, South Korea’s 2-1 win over the Czech Republic, as Korean fans went viral for their spirited interactions with local supporters ahead of the game.

Like other venues in Mexico, its edge-of-town location can make getting there a little tricky on matchdays — while there were long queues to get through security around two hours before kick-off. There was also some slightly concerning overcrowding in the concourse after last Thursday’s game, though it dissipated following a short wait.

Ratings

• Matchday experience 7/10
• Match atmosphere 8/10
• Transport and location 5/10
• Aesthetics 8/10
• Suitability for soccer/football 8/10

Total: 36/50

Jacob Whitehead

11. BC Place

(Richard Heathcote/Getty Images)

Vancouver’s BC Place is a bit of an outsider when it comes to this World Cup’s stadiums — geographically, it’s far removed from most of the others. It needed a new grass pitch. It’s big but doesn’t feel as big as some of the 15 other venues.

It’s still a fine venue to take in games, though. Its curved nature and closed roof mean the sounds of fans chanting become piercing. And in true British Columbia fashion, there’s plenty of room to move around, whether in the concourses or seats. You never feel boxed in at BC Place.

The stadium’s downtown location is darn near perfect. It only misses out because fans are being forced to travel to a SkyTrain stop further away from the place instead of the regular station. However, the 15-minute walk (depending on crowds) is pleasant, because of the views around False Creek.

Where the stadium lacks is looks: the world’s largest retractable roof will remain closed on matchdays as FIFA wants to avoid shadows on the pitch for TV audiences. But with the pleasantly moderate June weather in the city, not having an open roof for afternoon kick-offs feels like a letdown.

Ratings

• Matchday experience: 7/10
• Match atmosphere: 8/10
• Transport and location: 9/10
• Aesthetics: 6/10
• Suitability for soccer/football: 7/10

Total: 37/50

 Joshua Kloke

10. Lincoln Financial Field

(Emilee Chinn/Getty Images)

‘The Linc’, as everyone in Philadelphia calls it, was one of the best stadiums in the NFL when it opened in 2003.

That was after the city authorities knocked down the multi-purpose Veterans Stadium the teams shared and built The Linc for the Eagles and ‘The Bank’, which is across the street, for baseball’s Phillies.

Two decades is a lifetime in U.S. stadium history, so it has slid down the rankings since then, but is still a perfectly decent sports venue. It’s big, loud, has perfect sightlines, and a nice view of the city skyline from three sides of its stands.

I will admit I did not recognise the stadium’s “eagle” architectural motif until I read about it later, but I can kind of see it now… ish. I did spot the ‘Eagles Nest’ party deck in the northwest corner, though. Invites are welcome.

Compared to many NFL venues, this stadium is well-served by public transport (kudos to SEPTA Metro’s staff for getting 68,000 Ecuador and Ivory Coast fans safely to and from Sunday’s opening game), and the whole place has loads of previous as a football venue. I am a fan. 

Ratings

• Matchday experience: 8/10
• Match atmosphere: 8/10
• Transport and location: 7/10
• Aesthetics: 7/10
• Suitability for soccer/football: 8/10

Total: 38/50

Matt Slater

=5. Arrowhead Stadium

(Jamie Squire/Getty Images)

Arrowhead Stadium, Kansas City, holds the Guinness World Record for the loudest stadium after Kansas City Chiefs fans reached 142.2 decibels during an NFL game against the New England Patriots in 2014. To put that in context, the loudest crowd noise recorded at a European football stadium was 132 decibels at Vodafone Park, home of Turkish club Besiktas, seven years earlier.

That record reflects the passion of the Chiefs fans but also the stadium’s design, a steep bowl with an angled upper deck that is said to deflect crowd noise back down towards the pitch.

It was a source of disappointment then, when covering Argentina’s game against Algeria on Tuesday, to find that the press box, which is right at the top of the upper deck, was behind glass. But that is only a journalistic gripe, so it doesn’t affect the public experience or the rankings at all. Even from behind the thick glass, you could tell it was loud — and yes, of course, Lionel Messi helped with that.

It was surprising to learn that the Chiefs plan to relocate to a new $3billion domed arena when their lease here expires in January 2031. Arrowhead has been in use since 1972, making it the third-oldest stadium in the NFL, but by European standards it feels perfect for tomorrow’s needs, never mind today’s. It looks great, the facilities are great and — providing you are not watching the game inside in a sealed glass box — it sounds great.

One complaint: access. This stadium is served by a single bus route and, while there were extra buses laid on from the city centre and the fan festival, the pre-match traffic was still horrible.  Many of those travelling by car preferred to get out and walk for the final mile or so, despite the heat.

A flip-side of those access issues is a famous tailgating tradition, which would ideally play to Argentine asado culture, but it’s hard to bring a barbecue when you’re not a local. Traffic issues aside, a great stadium.

Ratings

• Matchday experience: 9/10
• Match atmosphere: 10/10
• Transport location and location: 4/10
• Aesthetics: 8/10
• Suitability for soccer/football: 9/10

Total: 40/50

Oliver Kay

=5. Estadio Azteca 

(Carl De Souza / AFP via Getty Images)

Mexico’s iconic national stadium is dripping with history. To watch a game at the Mexico City venue is to be transported back to the World Cups of 1970 and 1986; there is just something about the grandiose sweep of its bowl, the haziness of the light, the mountains in the distance. It is not a conventionally beautiful structure from the outside, but its brutalist concrete struts have a charm to them. Inside, the sheer scale of the place takes your breath away. 

The atmosphere is also hard to fault, even if you get the feeling that many regular Mexicans have been priced out this summer. Throw in genuinely great food stands, mariachi bands and more costumes than all the theatres of Broadway, and it’s hard to know what more you’d ever want from a World Cup stadium. Maybe non-apocalyptic traffic, to be fair — you really do have to plan your whole day around getting here on time — but the rest more than makes up for it.

Ratings

• Matchday experience: 8/10
• Match atmosphere: 9/10
• Transport and location: 3/10
• Aesthetics: 10/10
• Suitability for soccer/football: 10/10

Total: 40/50

Jack Lang

=5. BMO Field

(PVaughn Ridley/Getty Images)

BMO Field, as Toronto Stadium is normally known, with its temporary extra stands that look like they are built from giant scaffolding, is not a beautiful stadium from the exterior.

What it does have that makes it beautiful to fans of a certain age is a throwback feel to the old-style ‘ground’ rather than modern ‘stadium’. This rectangular venue, with clearly defined ends, to suck the ball towards or defend with your life, offers the best vibe to have while watching football in Toronto. Bonus points for the gaps in the corners between the four stands, which give a view of the city beyond.

It was built to be soccer-specific, so no surprise that it feels more authentic than something temporarily converted from another sport.

Being so centrally located, it was easy and cheap to get to via local transport, with parks and places to hang out within walking distance — the fan marches for both Canada and Bosnia-Herzegovina fans added to the sense of occasion. Because it was a game between one of the co-hosts and ‘fanaticos’ who travel well, all in all there was a great atmosphere.

Some Canadians were critical of BMO Field being used and advocated for the bigger BC Place staging all their nation’s World Cup matches. But with its old-school charm, Toronto was and is a winner.

Ratings

• Matchday experience: 8
• Match atmosphere: 8
• Transport and location: 9
• Aesthetics: 7 (6 external, 8 internal)
• Suitability for football: 8

Total: 40/50

Amy Lawrence

=5. Estadio BBVA

(Carl Recine/Getty Images)

Estadio BBVA in Monterrey, Mexico, really is as visually impressive as the photos suggest. 

It is a state-of-the-art venue with a futuristic design reminiscent of the Bernabeu, albeit this $200million arena was actually opened four years before renovation works got going on Real Madrid’s home stadium. The iconic view of the Cerro de la Silla mountain makes for striking surroundings too — although this is only fully visible if your seat is in the north stand.

You can’t fault it for atmosphere either. For the host city with arguably the four least appealing games of the whole tournament, the noise made during Sweden’s 5-1 win against Tunisia on Sunday was deafening. Swedish fans played a big role in that, but so too did the Tunisians and local spectators. Given the number of Mexico shirts on show for that match, it’s a real shame this is the only one of the country’s three selected stadiums not hosting El Tri this summer.

The drawbacks are to do with accessibility and the matchday experience. Long queues formed outside with an hour and a half to go until kick-off, with fans having to pass through airport-security-style gates. One Swede told The Athletic there were 30-minute waits inside to buy a drink and complained about the long walk to the nearest metro station afterwards. 

Ratings

• Matchday experience: 6/10
• Match atmosphere: 10/10
• Transport and location: 5/10
• Aesthetics: 9/10
• Suitability for soccer/football: 10/10

Total: 40/50

Tomas Hill Lopez-Menchero

=5. NRG Stadium

(Mark Felix / AFP via Getty Images)

NRG Stadium in Houston looks like a gigantic aircraft hangar as you approach it by train, with the support structures required for its retractable roof dominating the skyline. It sort of resembles a budget version of Milan’s San Siro from a distance, which carries an element of comfort for a European at a North American World Cup.

It’s hard to overstate how vast it is inside, and if you’re right at the top and you have vertigo, all the best.

This stadium was built 24 years ago, and there are elements of it that are starting to fray around the edges, and certain parts inside look like an ageing convention centre, but it’s actually really well suited to hosting football, once you get past the strangeness/slight novelty of the roof being closed. That roof means the noise inside echoes a bit, which can be quite a weird experience.

Unusually for some stadiums in the United States, there is a metro line that drops you right outside, so getting there is pretty straightforward, which is a bonus when the weather in Houston appears to oscillate between blazing sun and monsoon-esque rain. 

Ratings

• Matchday experience: 8
• Match atmosphere: 7
• Transport and location: 9
• Aesthetics: 7 
• Suitability for football: 9

Total: 40/50

Nick Miller

4. Gillette Stadium

(Maddie Meyer/Getty Images)

The 218ft-tall lighthouse, stationed behind one of the goals, is an iconic sight. With a 360-degree observatory, it is the first thing your eyes are alerted to as the stadium appears in the distance. That it was only installed three years ago is the biggest surprise. 

Built in 2002, this arena in Foxboro somehow possesses the character of a throwback stadium while looking more modern. That feels like a pretty healthy balance.

Parts of the facade look a little indistinct, with lots of offices and annexed buildings attached in different places, but it is mighty in scale. 

The walkways on the outside of the stadium offer terrific panoramas, and there are a good variety of food vendors and beer stalls to meet demand. 

It may not have been designed to host football, but it translates well. The stands are steep and amplify sound, as Scotland and Norway fans have already demonstrated. The pitch is also not set so far back from them that the game feels disconnected, and the giant curved screen at the far end adds a bit of theatre.

What counts against it is the location.

Located 30 miles south-west of Boston, it feels a little isolated. There is the Patriot Place shopping area, but no stretches of bars and restaurants in neighbouring streets for fans to pile into the game from or spend hours in before kick-off. 

There is a limited flow of trains down from Boston and up from Providence, with the prices of those that do run bumped up to a prohibitively high cost of $80 for a return trip.

Travelling by car towards Boston after your game is guaranteed to end up at a standstill because of a narrow motorway that is reduced to one lane in places. So much so, two Norwegians took it upon themselves to walk along the highway instead. 

Ratings

• Matchday experience: 9/10
• Match atmosphere: 9/10
• Transport and location: 6/10
• Aesthetics: 8/10
• Suitability for football: 9/10

Total: 41/50

Jordan Campbell

3. SoFi Stadium

(Luke Hales/Getty Images)

To start, it was noticeable that traffic in the surrounding area was not bad in the hours leading up to the game. There are options via Metro and buses that transport fans from remote parking locations. It was actually quite easy getting into stadium parking in a car for media members. Long lines formed to get in four hours ahead of kick-off, but once the gates opened, fans seemed almost to disappear as they moved quickly through security and into the building.

The stadium itself is gorgeous. Really a marvel. The grounds are easy to navigate, even despite FIFA’s fenced-in areas. Walking around the concourse before the game, fans seemed thrilled to be there and able to find their seats easily. The views from the very top section are fine, with the enormous screens there to help you take in the action.

While it’s a bit tight around the outside of the pitch, the field played brilliantly, and the crowd for USA-Paraguay was everything you could ask for. The co-hosts’ thumping 4-1 win helped make it a celebratory mood, of course.

Ratings

• Matchday experience: 9/10
• Match atmosphere: 9/10
• Transport and location: 8/10
• Aesthetics: 10/10
• Suitability for soccer/football: 8/10

Total: 44/50

Paul Tenorio

=1. Lumen Field

(David Ryder/AFP via Getty Images)

What a place. There are two things I love about Lumen Field.

The first is its location, right in the centre of downtown Seattle. There is so much that is great about this, but primarily it means the city feels alive wherever you are on a matchday. Nobody stresses about how they are going to get out to the stadium. Local organisers have done an excellent job at providing a carnival around the venue, with the Pioneer Square area bouncing ahead of Egypt’s game with Belgium. It was great to see independent bars, pubs and restaurants embracing and benefiting from Seattle being a host city.

Then there is the stadium’s design. This is not an identikit bowl that could be anywhere. Each stand is shaped differently, but it is known especially for the Hawk’s Nest, which offers views of downtown and beyond. I cannot think of a stadium in the world that feels so connected to the city it belongs to.

Ratings

• Matchday experience 9/10
• Match atmosphere 8/10
• Transport and location 10/10
• Aesthetics 10/10
• Suitability for soccer/football 10/10

Total: 47/50

Simon Hughes

=1. Mercedes-Benz Stadium

(Mattia Ozbot/Getty Images)

It’s downtown. It’s indoors. It’s gigantic. Mercedes-Benz Stadium (or Atlanta Stadium, according to FIFA) is the type of thing you’d sketch as a child if your art teacher said: “No rules. Draw an imaginary stadium.”

It has restaurants, bars, shopping and more. Getting there is easy on public transport. It’s home to the NFL’s Atlanta Falcons and Atlanta United of MLS. The Benz, as locals call it, is a big-event venue, regularly hosting high-profile college football games and music acts. It staged the 2019 Super Bowl and will do so again in 2028.

Perhaps best of all, it’s indoors and air-conditioned, which allows concert-goers and sports fans to escape the hot Atlanta weather in summer and the city’s unpredictable winter conditions.

The acoustics are fine-tuned, and it also features the most fan-friendly concession prices in America. 

Ratings

• Matchday experience: 10/10
• Match atmosphere: 9/10
• Transport and location: 9/10
• Aesthetics: 9/10
• Suitability for soccer/football: 10/10

Total: 47/50

Felipe Cardenas