How Many Value Bets Appear Per Day? Evidence From 17,913 Listings
OddsFantasy’s value-bet feed listed an average of 4,478 pre-match value bets per day between 16–19 October 2026, UTC: 17,913 listings across 2,348 matches. That measures opportunities appearing throughout the sample, not bets available simultaneously. The available aggregate figures do not establish the daily median or daily minimum and maximum.
OddsFantasy lists a pre-match value bet when a bookmaker or Polymarket offers better odds than Pinnacle’s no-vig odds for the same outcome. During 16–19 October 2026, UTC, the feed covered 1xBet, BC.Game, Cloudbet, Kalshi, Matchbook, Pinnacle, Polymarket, Rollbit, SBOBET, Smarkets, Stake and Vave. These figures measure listings, with expected value defined as the expected return per unit staked at the offered odds, before fees. Listing lifetime runs from first appearance to removal; because the feed refreshes every few minutes, very short lifetimes are rounded up to the next refresh.
The 4,478 figure is the daily average for this four-day sample, not an observed daily median or a daily target. OddsFantasy’s aggregate results for 16–19 October 2026 do not include individual daily totals, so they cannot establish how far the busiest and quietest days differed.
That distinction matters when planning a betting routine. An average spread across four days does not tell you how many qualifying opportunities will be on screen during one session. A defensible daily-variation analysis would require separate totals for each UTC day, followed by the median and range. Neither should be inferred from the combined total.
The sample contained a calculated average of 7.63 value-bet listings per covered match: 17,913 divided by 2,348. This is an arithmetic average across matches represented in OddsFantasy’s feed during 16–19 October 2026, not a median or a count for every fixture.
A match can contain different outcomes, markets and bookmaker prices, so listings per match are not independent betting decisions. The aggregate figures do not provide a per-match minimum, maximum or distribution. They also do not establish how many matches in the wider sporting schedule had no listed edge.
Market coverage helps explain the breadth of the total. In OddsFantasy’s feed during 16–19 October 2026, handicap markets accounted for 29% of listings, moneyline 23%, totals 17% and team totals 15%. Football supplied 70% of listings, compared with basketball’s 11%. A bettor concentrating on one sport or market is therefore looking at a narrower opportunity set.
1xBet supplied the largest share of listed prices in OddsFantasy’s feed during 16–19 October 2026, at 31%. Polymarket accounted for 24%, Vave 23%, BC.Game 7.8%, Matchbook 6.3% and other covered venues 7.3%. These shares describe where the listed price was offered, rather than where bets were placed.
Bookmaker access therefore changes how relevant the headline count is to you. The broader OddsFantasy product covers 50+ bookmakers across regions, including exchanges and prediction markets, but this measurement used the specific coverage listed above. Neither the broader coverage figure nor the sample’s venue shares establish a daily quota at any individual bookmaker.
Raising the minimum EV reduced the qualifying pool sharply in OddsFantasy’s feed during 16–19 October 2026. A minimum of at least 2% retained 65% (11,667) of listings; at least 3% retained 39% (6,902); at least 5% retained 16% (2,928); and at least 10% retained 3.4% (606). These are nested thresholds, so their counts should not be added together.
The median listed EV was 2.48%; 25% of listings showed at least 3.94%, and 10% showed at least 6.28%. A high minimum does not merely tidy the screen: it selects a substantially smaller part of the observed feed. Those counts cover the whole sample, not a simultaneous shortlist.
Odds restrictions narrow the pool differently. The median listing was at decimal odds of 1.78, and 40% were in the 1.5–2 band. The aggregate data do not show the overlap between odds bands, EV thresholds, sports and venues. You cannot calculate a combined filtered count by multiplying their separate shares.
Among the 17,724 value bets that left OddsFantasy’s feed during 16–19 October 2026, the median stayed listed for 19 minutes. Of that group, 22% were gone within 5 minutes, 43% within 15 minutes and 32% remained for an hour or more. A daily total therefore combines opportunities with very different response windows.
Arrival time also varied. The median listing appeared 10.0 hours before kickoff; 19% appeared in the final hour and 14% more than two days ahead. The busiest arrival hours were 05:00 UTC, with 5.6% of listings, and 09:00 and 13:00 UTC, each with 5.5%. These sample-specific concentrations do not establish a repeatable best hour.
Listing lifetime is not a reservation on a price. Check the current quote when acting, rather than treating an alert’s original price as still available. Faster monitoring can reduce reaction delay, but the lifetime statistics do not show whether an order could have filled.
The feed totals do not establish an executable-bet count, because detection is different from obtaining a fill at the required price and size. Costs can also remove an apparent edge: OddsFantasy’s feed listed 4,372 Polymarket opportunities (24%) with a median EV of 1.94%, and 62% remained positive after applying the sports taker fee of 0.05 × price × (1 − price) per share.
Historical observations and executions answer different questions. The Odds API’s historical-data documentation describes snapshots of events and bookmaker odds at particular points in time. Such records help establish what was observed, but do not by themselves establish that a bettor obtained that price.
An empty filtered screen is not necessarily a problem. BetFinder’s value-betting guide explains that its board can show no qualifying edges and that claims disappear as prices change or fail credibility checks. Its standards are separate from OddsFantasy’s method, but the practical distinction is useful: a cumulative archive and a current board answer different questions.
Use the OddsFantasy positive EV finder to build a current shortlist that matches your execution route, rather than treating the daily average as a betting target. It lists pre-match opportunities from sportsbooks, exchanges and prediction markets against Pinnacle’s no-vig odds, with expected value and a bookmaker link.
Judge availability at three levels: the historical feed total, your qualifying shortlist and your actual executions. Keeping those separate makes the 4,478 daily average useful context without turning it into an expectation of how many bets you should place.
OddsFantasy’s value-bet feed averaged 4,478 pre-match listings per day during 16–19 October 2026, UTC, with 17,913 listings across 2,348 matches. This is a cumulative daily average, not the number available simultaneously or the number anyone executed.
The daily median and range cannot be determined from the aggregate figures for 16–19 October 2026. The reported 4,478 daily figure is an average; calculating a median, minimum and maximum requires the individual daily totals.
The calculated average was 7.63 listings per covered match during 16–19 October 2026, using OddsFantasy’s 17,913 listings across 2,348 matches. The figures do not establish a per-match median or range, and multiple listings need not represent independent bets.
A minimum EV of at least 5% retained 16% (2,928) of OddsFantasy’s value-bet listings during 16–19 October 2026. That is a count across the full sample, not a simultaneous board count or an execution count.
The median listing lifetime was 19 minutes among the 17,724 value bets removed from OddsFantasy’s feed during 16–19 October 2026. Of those listings, 22% disappeared within 5 minutes and 43% within 15 minutes; feed refresh intervals affect the measurement of very short lifetimes.
Compare fair-odds sources, sports coverage, execution prices, automation and tracking before choosing positive-EV software for pre...
Compare sharp no-vig probabilities with executable Polymarket prices, then account for fees, liquidity and stale odds before autom...
Six value betting tools compared on how they find value, which books they cover and what they cost, plus OddsFantasy feed data: th...