NFL Favorites With Worse Records: Should You Fade Them?

NFL favorites with a worse record than their opponent cover about as often as any other favorite. We checked every regular-season game from 1999 through 2025, starting in Week 5, and found 1,008 games where the team laying points had the worse record. Those favorites went 485-499-24 against the spread, a 49.29 percent cover rate. All favorites in the same weeks covered 49.48 percent. The worse-record favorites also won outright 59.9 percent of the time. Taking the underdog with the better record would have covered 50.71 percent, short of the 52.38 percent you need to break even at -110. The Best Bet on Sports has built a verified $367,520+ in profit across all sportsbooks over more than twenty years, and one of the first lessons is that a team's record is already in the price.

Every Sunday there's at least one game that looks wrong. A 2-5 team is favored over a 5-3 team, and the natural reaction is that the books made a mistake, or that they're baiting you. Today's version is New Orleans, 2-5, laying 3 points at home to Cleveland, 5-3. So we tested the idea directly. If the market really overrates teams with worse records, fading them should have paid over 27 seasons. It didn't.

How Did We Test Favorites With Worse Records?

We used the nflverse game file for every regular-season game from 1999 through 2025, plus 2026 through the Thursday game of Week 9. For each game, we rebuilt each team's record going into that week, using only games already played. We started in Week 5 so every team had at least three or four games on its record, and we dropped pick'em games, where there's no favorite.

A game qualifies when the favorite's win percentage going into the week was lower than the underdog's. Ties count as half a win. We graded every game against the closing spread. That's 1,008 qualifying games out of 5,276 with a favorite in Weeks 5 and later.

Do Favorites With Worse Records Cover the Spread?

About as often as everyone else.

The gap between worse-record favorites and all favorites is two tenths of a percentage point. On 984 graded games, that's about two bets. Nothing about the matchup of records separates these games from any other.

Look at the outright column too. The team with the worse record won 59.92 percent of the time. In six games out of ten, the market's opinion beat the standings. That's the real lesson here. When a book makes a team with a worse record the favorite, it usually has a reason: an injury on the other side, a quarterback change, a bad record built on close losses, or a good record built on a soft schedule. Records are a summary of results. The spread is a forecast.

Does a Bigger Record Gap Change the Result?

You'd expect the edge, if there is one, to show up when the gap is large. A 2-6 team favored over a 6-2 team should look worse than a 4-4 team favored over a 5-3 team. It doesn't show up there either.

The biggest gap produced the lowest favorite cover rate, 46.26 percent. That sounds like an edge for the underdog until you check the sample. It's 147 graded games, and a gap that size is well within normal variance. A coin that lands heads 50 percent of the time will show a 46-54 split in a sample this size fairly often. Meanwhile, the middle band went the other way, with favorites covering 51.52 percent. There's no trend from small gap to big gap, just noise around 50 percent.

We also checked games where both teams had played the same number of games, so the gap could be measured in wins. Favorites down one win covered 51.39 percent. Favorites down two wins covered 51.56 percent. Favorites down three or more covered 50.68 percent. If anything, those favorites did a little better than average.

What About Losing Teams Favored Over Winning Teams?

This is the version that looks most wrong: a team with a losing record laying points to a team with a winning record. There were 260 of these games from 1999 through 2025 in Weeks 5 and later.

The losing favorites won outright 58.08 percent of the time. Against the spread, the underdog side covered 51.37 percent. That's the best number in this study for the "fade the bad favorite" crowd, and it's still below the 52.38 percent needed to break even at -110.

The sub-splits are small. Thirty-nine road games isn't a sample anyone should bet on. And the split by spread size goes the wrong way for the theory. When the market made a losing team a bigger favorite, that team covered more often, not less.

Has This Changed Over Time?

Not in any useful way.

The most recent nine seasons are the worst for these favorites, but 48.38 percent on 308 graded games is still within variance of a fair coin. Worse-record favorites covered at better than 50 percent in 12 of the 27 seasons, about what you'd expect from no edge at all.

By time of season, favorites covered 46.67 percent in Weeks 5-8, 47.79 percent in Weeks 9-13 and 53.75 percent in Weeks 14-18. That late-season number is the one spot that looks interesting. Late in the year, records carry more games, so a team favored despite a worse record has really convinced the market. Still, 307 graded games at 53.75 percent is a little more than one standard deviation from 50, and we wouldn't build a betting plan around it.

This season, worse-record favorites are 10-9 against the spread in Weeks 5 through 8, a 52.63 percent rate on a very small sample.

What Does This Mean for Today's Saints-Browns Game?

New Orleans is 2-5 and favored by 3 at home against Cleveland, 5-3, according to this morning's closing-line feed. It's the only game on the Week 9 Sunday slate where the favorite has the worse record. Historically, a home favorite with a worse record covered 48.40 percent of the time (393-419-21), and a losing home favorite against a winning underdog covered 47.00 percent.

Neither number is a strong enough reason to take Cleveland. Both are within normal variance of 50 percent, and both are below the 52.38 percent the Browns would need at -110. The useful question isn't whether the Saints have a worse record. It's why the market made them the favorite anyway, and whether that reason holds up. That's a matchup question, not a standings question.

Why Does This Matter When You Pay for Picks?

Because a lot of picks are built on records. "The better team is getting points" is one of the most common reasons you'll hear for an underdog play. It sounds sharp. Over 27 seasons, it was worth 50.71 percent, which loses money after the vig.

That's the same pattern we found when we tested bad NFL teams against the spread and NFL teams after an upset loss. Records, streaks and recent results are visible to everyone, so the market prices them. If you're paying for NFL picks against the spread, you should be paying for something the standings don't already show.

That's why our football handicappers focus on the live game rather than the pregame standings. If you're comparing services, our guide to a sports handicapping service explains what to look for, and our expert sports picks page shows how we approach each slate. The weekly card is on our NFL picks page. Basketball bettors run into the same trap with records early in the season, and our basketball handicappers page explains how we handle it.

What This Study Doesn't Cover

This study uses closing spreads and regular-season games from Week 5 on. It compares records only, not point differential, strength of schedule or injuries, which are the factors most likely to explain why a worse-record team is favored. It doesn't separate games by quarterback changes. The 2026 sample runs through Week 8, plus the Week 9 Thursday game, and the Saints-Browns spread is the closing-line feed as of Sunday morning. Lines move, so check the number before kickoff.

Get Tonight's Live Picks

Want live in-game NFL calls, including the spots where the pregame favorite starts playing like its record, sent to your phone during the game?

The Best Bet on Sports is the only live betting handicapping service limited on all six major U.S. sportsbooks (FanDuel, DraftKings, Caesars, BetMGM, Fanatics, ESPN BET) for winning too much during in-game action. Verified profit: $367,520+. Live calls go out through Email and Discord during games, and every bet in the $10,000 to $100,000 challenge is posted as it happens.

→ Join The Best Bet on Sports community — newsletter, live stream and Discord → Try a free live pick first — reserve your spot for tonight's pick

Frequently Asked Questions

Do NFL favorites with worse records cover the spread?

About as often as any other favorite. From 1999 through 2025, in Weeks 5 and later, favorites with a worse record than their opponent went 485-499-24 against the spread, a 49.29 percent cover rate. All favorites in those weeks covered 49.48 percent.

Should you bet the underdog when it has a better record?

Not for that reason alone. Underdogs with the better record covered 50.71 percent of the time from 1999 through 2025, below the 52.38 percent needed to break even at standard -110 odds. The favorites in those games won outright 59.92 percent of the time.

Why would a team with a worse record be favored?

Usually because the market sees something the standings don't: an injury, a quarterback change, a record built on close losses, or a good record built against weak opponents. Worse-record favorites won outright about six times in ten, so the market's read was usually right.

Do losing teams favored over winning teams cover?

Slightly less often than average, but not by enough to bet. Favorites with a losing record against underdogs with a winning record went 124-131-5 against the spread from 1999 through 2025, or 48.63 percent. The underdog side covered 51.37 percent, still short of break-even at -110.

Does a bigger record gap help the underdog?

No clear pattern. When the underdog's win-percentage edge was more than .300, favorites covered 46.26 percent, but that's only 147 graded games. When the edge was .151 to .300, favorites covered 51.52 percent. The numbers bounce around 50 percent without a trend.

Are there any spots where worse-record favorites do well?

Late in the season the number looks better. From Week 14 on, worse-record favorites covered 53.75 percent, compared with 46.67 percent in Weeks 5-8. That's a little more than one standard deviation from 50 percent, so it's worth watching, not betting blindly.

Which game this week has a favorite with a worse record?

On the Week 9 Sunday slate, New Orleans (2-5) is a 3-point home favorite against Cleveland (5-3), based on Sunday morning's closing-line feed. Historically, losing home favorites against winning underdogs covered 47.00 percent, which isn't enough to justify the Browns at -110 on its own.