The official UCI rankings for 2026 are out and with them here are the final promotion and relegation standings. Uno-X, Lotto-Intermarché and Israel-PremierTech should move up to the World Tour while Cofidis get relegated… but it’s not yet as simple as that.
The red line in the chart above marks 19th place, those teams above are eligible for the World Tour in the next three year cycle across 2026-2028, normally it’s the top-18 but Intermarché is stopping. It’s not the subject of the piece but you can see UAE with over 40,000 points this season alone, only the next six teams after them scored as much across three seasons.
Look closer at the chart above and you can see how promotion candidates Lotto made it thanks to a strong haul in previous years when they’ve had a dire season. And they’re merging with Intermarché which fared even worse this year.
Uno-X pip Cofidis for the last place above the red line, just 397 points between them over three seasons.
Arkéa-B&B Hotels get relegated too. But that’s a footnote given the team won’t exist next year. The team did well to qualify for the World Tour by scoring beaucoup points across the 2020-2022 seasons but then seemed like the proverbial dog that chases cars, it did not know what to do once it caught a World Tour licence. It only had one World Tour win in its three years at the top although some other results here and there to be proud of.
This chart shows the relegation contest across the season. Two things stand out: first is how far back XDS-Astana started and how they’ve kept climbing all season; the second is the red line of Cofidis and how it’s been relatively flat.
At the end of May Cofidis were just ahead of XDS-Astana, Picnic-PostNL and well ahead Uno-X but the team stalled in the Tour and Vuelta and other summer races. Picnic-PostNL kept looking like they had the quality to stay up and Oscar Onley’s summer saved them.
It’s not so simple, part I
There can be a final count and in previous years some teams have contacted the UCI to get errors fixed and ensure missing points are counted. But the gaps involved are too big here. Plus having checked the scores for Cofidis there’s no chance of a last minute appeal. Some results websites list Stanisław Aniołkowski with 641 points while the UCI put him on 626. But there’s no scandal, it’s because you can compute 641 points from his race results but he also got a 15 point penalty from the commissaires which hasn’t been logged.
It’s not so simple, part II
The rankings above illustrate the “sporting criteria” as to whether a team is eligible for the World Tour or not. But this is one criterion and it only applies after the admin, financial, organisation and ethical criteria have been met. This review process is underway now and lasts around a month.
So we can assume that Lotto-Intermarché works as a merger but it’s up to the UCI and its auditors to review the legality and the funding in place for the team. If all is good then they should get back into the World Tour, let’s hope. But today it’s conditional.
Likewise Israel-PremierTech has scored plenty of points but it’s on them to show the UCI a valid project for 2026 given the team is trying to change identity and its chief backer Sylvan Adams is going to step away from the team, at least in terms of speaking for the team but if he decides to reduce the funding this could be significant. There’s no sign to say this is going to happen, so again we ought to assume the team is promoted but there are questions to answer. That’s what the licence process is for.
The same goes for all the other World Tour teams, we should assume that they get approved for next season that’s the whole point of the annual review happening in the background now. For example if Deceuninck is stepping back as a title sponsor, does Alpecin have the budget given there’s no named replacement, and so on.
All this means we’re assuming 18 WorldTeams for 2026 and it’s a fair scenario but it’s not yet certain. A nasty surprise for one team and maybe Cofidis stays in the the World Tour? They’ve actually applied for a World Tour licence, it’s prudent to do this. It’s one reason why the promotion and relegation battle in pro cycling is probably for insiders as it’s not as clear cut as the arithmetic of a league table in football or basketball.
Three year cycle, annual review
While the licence attribution is for the next three seasons, there is always an annual review. This matters for Lotto-Intermarché as Belgium has passed a law banning gambling advertising in all forms including lotteries, scratchcards etc. There’s been an exemption for shirt sponsorship until the end of 2027 which has allowed Lotto to continue. 2028 might seem far away but it will be felt soon, if the team approaches a rider next spring with a two year contract, ie 2027+2028 they and their agent will want to know what the team will do if its prime backer is soon banned from sponsoring the team.
Automatic invites
Assuming there are 18 World Tour teams for 2026 then the top-3 teams from the 2025 rankings that aren’t in the World Tour qualify for a wildcard next year. Tudor Pro Cycling is well clear here with Q36.5 and Cofidis next. They’ll all welcome this security.
Wildcards
There are two places left for the grand tours. New for 2026 is that a team must be among the top-30 teams on the previous season’s rankings. So among the candidates for a grand tour start Solution Tech-Vini Fantini are not eligible for the Giro d’Italia as they’re in 31st place, pipped by VF Bardiani in 30th place. Similarly Euskaltel-Euskadi are in 34th place and so can’t hope for a Vuelta a España invite either.
Women’s World Tour
There’s been less of a contest here for the 2024-2025 two year cycle to be in the top-15 teams. EF-Oatly and VolkerWessels are eligible at the expense of Ceratizit and Roland-Le Dévoluy which are stopping. But only the US team is applying to join the World Tour, the Dutch team will instead qualify for automatic invitations VolkerWessels alongside Laboral Kutxa-Euskadi as the two best teams outside of the Women’s World Tour.
Conclusion
XDS-Astana did it against the odds but who saw Uno-X getting promoted this time last year? Still an admin asterisk awaits, one conclusion is it is hard to be conclusive today. The official rankings are out today and in terms of the count the merging Lotto-Intermarché team, Israel-PremierTech and Uno-X are eligible for promotion to the World Tour while Cofidis are relegated and Arkéa-B&B stop. It’s the most probable scenario but not yet certain as in the background the UCI is reviewing each team’s viability.
Another three year cycle starts now across the 2026, 2027 and 2028 seasons for the men’s and women’s teams alike.
It feels so strange to not know for sure who will be on the WorldTour startlists next year, but assuming that everything goes as expected it’s just another year with teams we’ve watched for awhile quietly disappearing. Speaking of disappearing, it’s especially strange to think of regional teams like Euskaltel and Vini Fantini getting locked out of their national GTs. On the other hand, Tietema Rockets have been so dynamic that it makes sense that they will get more prominent opportunities. One thing is for sure in pro cycling: if you’re not one of the big dogs, nothing is guaranteed.
Just on cue the UCI say 19 teams have applied for a World Tour licence… including Cofidis and Q36.5 but not Jayco. The Aussie team can still get the paperwork in order but it shows the end of season count is provisional on the admin and finance. Fingers crossed for Jayco.
Does the 2026 roster of only 20 contracted riders (according to PCS) support the doubt. Even Matthews is – as yet – absent. There have been various attempts by Ryan to reduce his committment over recent years. Is this another one?
For 2025 Double has been a good value for money (or UCI points) pick.
That’s the concern, with Al Ula possibly leaving soon. Matthews should have renewed but it’s not been news yet… unless it’s news that was was going to happen has fallen through.
The team has been trying to make clever signings outside the World Tour and Double has paid off.
PCS works hard to get the contract details but it’s not a source of record. See the Aniołkowski on 641 points on the website when he’s on 626 etc.
On the 2023 – 2025 team ranking page his points are correct.
Ackermann signed a new contract with a Tour de France team, but was not allowed to announce. Rumours say it is jayco.
Neither has Intermarché. According to Wielerflits means that the riders now are officially allowed to sign contracts with other teams. Does the same apply for Jayco’s riders?
Also notable: Alpecin-Deceuninck has applied under that name and Israel-Premier Tech as ‘Cycling Academy’.
Two new Pro Teams have applied: Modern Adventure Pro Cycling and MHB Bank CSB Ballan. The former is a new team started by George Hincapie, the latter a long running team (mainly known as Colpack) coming up from continental level with help of Hungarian money (the MHB Bank). Good there are new teams, but both George Hincapie and Hungarian money are things that come with bagage.
Yes for Jayco’s riders and Intermarché alike (edit: not now for Intermarché perhaps it seems as the CPA union pushes for the merger to be treated as done, complicated). It seems Jayco is intent on racing next year so no need for an exodus or some bargain picks for other teams for the moment.
We’ll see for Alpecin-Deceuninck, some teams can just apply with the existing name or a holding name, and then unveil the real name on 1 January etc. But perhaps Deceuninck is staying as a title sponsor?
Q36.5 seem to have made some smart recruitment for 2026 and beyond. That will make them far more than a one man band and, despite the next cycle only starting in 2026, they look future WT certs. Does Q36.5, a cycle clothing brand, really have the ressource to support that ambition, or maybe UBS are providing substantial but discrete funding?
It’s backed by mining billionaire and cycling convert Ivan Glasenberg, who has Pinarello too. The team will likely be Pinarello-Q36.5 next year.
The UCI must spend a good 14 seconds on the ‘ethical criteria’, considering who sponsors cycle teams.
The ethical part is circular as it’s largely about respecting UCI rules and the UCI’s Code of Ethics.
Well, I won’t comment on the UCI’s Code of Ethics.
My brother-in-law (who I don’t think will ask here) questions if it is three wildcards and two invites? And if so – me, I’m just assuming you’re right – was it two wildcards and three invites this year?
It was two wildcards and two invites this year until it was changed to allow three invites this season. Now it’s going to be three invites and two wildcards next year.
Thanks
This year it was two obligatory invitations (to Lotto and IPT) for grand tours and stage races and three (to Lotto, IPT and Uno-X) for one day races.
The number of wild cards for grand tours drops from three (two plus one extra granted by UCI this year) to two.
Nice preterition.
ta
The UCI being an olympic aligned sport probably little flexibility to ban teams from countries that are allowed in the olympics. I think they have banned Russian teams but they are banned from olympics probably. Not just for wars. But really because of rampant state based cheating.
The UCI’s Ethical criteria get mocked but they are no bad thing. The sport has tightened up its Ethics Charter and long-term readers might remember Brian Cookson’s charge against the Astana team which lead to a lot changes behind the scenes for teams, eg riders have to have coaches, team doctors cannot coach, race days are capped, team managers can’t work as agents etc.
The good thing is this doesn’t take long to check because the sport has agreed to all of this but it was a wilder place 20 years ago.
@ J Evan – perhaps 4 seconds if that.
Note: the bar chart figure has the red line after the 19th team, not the 18th.
Thanks, and fixed the text above to explain it better.
Relegation should actually mean that; and no racing in any WT races……Imagine being relegated from the Premier League but still allowed to play a few Premier League teams…..it’s an absolute nonsense; and so typical of cycling.
And the 3 year cycle is a mess as well…….
*Why* should relegation actually should mean that? *Why* should not the three best ProTeams race in WT races?
(Please note that a relegated team does *not* get an automatic invitation if there are three ProTeams with more points.)
And which teams should race in WT races in their place? ProTeams that did even worse than they did?
Or are you proposing that there should only be 18 teams in WT races? If not, should there be more than 18 WT teams?
And what exactly makes the three-year-cycle a mess? Why should cycling copy football here?
Relegated teams are not forbidden to play higher class teams. It’s called cup.
Or orange instead of apple.
It can work well, a relegated team can be picked for some races – there’s good and bad with this – but is not obliged to do them all. So Bardiani can still do the Giro, Caja Rural at the Vuelta etc.
Unibet are putting together a team that, as a minimum, gives the appearance of not being completely out of place as a wildcard for the Tour de France. Even as recently as a year ago their ambition to ride there looked very ambitious but the cards have fallen into place and they have not been backward in helping themselves either. Though they will surely be hoping that none of their new recruits do a Carboni.