Dividing receiving yards by routes run - not targets or catches - credits a receiver for every route he runs, making YPRR the closest thing to a true per-opportunity rate for pass-catchers.
By The NFL Analytics Editorial Team · Published June 14, 2026
Every receiving rate stat is a fraction, and the argument about which one is best is really an argument about what belongs in the denominator. Receiving yards per game rewards volume. Yards per catch rewards depth. Yards per target rewards efficiency on the throws a receiver actually drew. Yards per route run (YPRR) changes the denominator to something more fundamental than any of these: the number of pass routes a receiver ran. It asks how many receiving yards a player produces for every snap he is actually out running a route, whether or not the quarterback ever looked his way.
That small change has large consequences. A receiver does not control how often he is targeted - the play call, the coverage, the quarterback's reads, and the protection all decide that. What he largely does control is how often he gets open and turns a route into yardage when he is part of the pattern. By dividing by routes rather than targets or catches, YPRR credits a receiver for the work of running routes that pull coverage, create space, and occasionally produce a target, instead of only measuring what happened on the handful of plays the ball came his way.
The formula is as simple as the rate stats it improves on:
YPRR = Receiving yards ÷ Routes run
The numerator is just receiving yards, straight from the box score. The denominator is the part that requires work: a route run is a play on which the receiver was sent out into the pass pattern as a potential receiver. That sounds obvious, but counting it accurately is not something the standard play-by-play feed does for you.
Two things make routes run a charted quantity rather than a box-score one:
Because of that, YPRR is published by charting operations and tracking-data providers rather than appearing automatically in a standard stat line. As with any charted metric, the figures are meaningful and comparable within one provider's methodology, but you should not assume two sources counted routes identically.
To see why YPRR is the better efficiency stat, it helps to walk up the ladder of denominators and notice what each one rewards and what it hides.
Receiving yards ÷ receptions. Rewards depth - a deep threat who catches a few long balls looks elite. But it ignores every incompletion and every route that drew no target, so a low-volume burner can post a gaudy number on almost no real production.
Receiving yards ÷ targets. Better - it counts the incompletions against the receiver. But it only sees plays where the ball came his way, so it says nothing about how often he was a viable option, and it can be inflated by a tiny target count.
Receiving yards ÷ routes run. Counts every play the receiver was part of the pattern, targeted or not. A receiver who is constantly open but ignored, or who is the focus of coverage, is measured on his full body of work, not a target subsample.
The core problem with yards per target and yards per catch is the same: their denominators are endogenous to the very thing you are trying to measure. Targets and catches are outcomes the receiver only partly controls. A great route-runner can run a brilliant route, beat his man, and still get zero targets because the coverage rotated elsewhere or the quarterback's first read was open. Yards per target literally cannot see that route. Yards per route run can, because the route went into the denominator regardless of whether a target followed.
Consider a clearly hypothetical contrast to make the gap concrete:
Hypothetical figures for illustration only - not any real player's stats.
This is also why analysts have come to treat YPRR as one of the most reliable receiver-efficiency numbers available, and why it tends to be more predictive year to year than the target-based rates. It is built on a larger, more stable denominator and is far less hostage to the noise of how often a particular quarterback happened to look a receiver's way.
Yards per route run is a rate, and like any rate it hides the volume underneath it. That is where route participation - the share of his team's pass plays on which a receiver actually ran a route - becomes essential context.
Route participation = Routes run ÷ Team pass plays (dropbacks)
Two receivers can have the same YPRR while playing completely different roles:
Reading YPRR without route participation is like reading a batting average without knowing the number of at-bats. A strong YPRR on high route participation is a much sturdier signal than the same YPRR on a sliver of snaps, because the former has survived a full, varied workload while the latter may be a small-sample artifact. Route participation is also how you spot a rising role before the targets catch up: a young receiver whose participation is climbing is being trusted with more of the route tree, which often precedes a target-share jump.
For the same reason, YPRR pairs naturally with the broader snap counts and usage picture and with target share and WOPR. YPRR tells you how efficient a receiver is per route; participation, snap share, and target share tell you how large and central his role is. Efficiency without role can be a specialist; role without efficiency can be an empty-calories target hog. You want to see both.
Yards per route run is among the best receiver-efficiency tools, but it is not a clean, context-free grade:
Yards per route run divides a receiver's receiving yards by the number of routes he ran, swapping in a denominator the receiver largely controls for the target- and catch-based denominators he does not. That makes it the best simple measure of per-opportunity receiving efficiency, because it credits a player for every route - including the ones that pulled coverage or got him open without ever drawing a target - rather than only the plays the ball came his way. It is a charted statistic: routes run must be identified from film or tracking data, so figures vary by provider and should be read as trends. Always pair it with route participation and total route volume, which supply the workload context a rate stat cannot carry on its own, and treat efficiency and role as two halves of the same evaluation.
Want the code behind these metrics? Work through the 45-chapter NFL analytics tutorial.
Browse tutorials Free tools