Manchester City and Chelsea have overhauled their squads in recent years since becoming part of the Premier League's richest elite, but who has spent their money better when making record breaking deals?

The drawn out transfer saga of Raheem Sterling this summer has seen City fork over more cash than ever before, but Chelsea's biggest signing of all time was still a little bit more expensive in the form of Fernando Torres. 

Both clubs have perhaps found themselves at the mercy of selling teams who know that they have a big transfer budget to play with, but when it comes to their top five most expensive signings, who has fared better in the market?

Four of the players City have spent big on are still at the club, compared to Chelsea's three, but there's no doubt that Costa, Fabregas and Hazard all played a huge role in bringing the title to Stamford Bridge last season. 

So, who do you think has spent better when breaking the bank?