Every play StatIQ logged at a price before the game started, graded in the open afterwards. Wins and losses, never deleted — loading the ledger…
…
loading
The public record — wins and losses, kept · StatIQ Sports
StatIQNFL projections — with the receipts
DetailAdds the projection, the line and the graded result.
The record
Every play StatIQ logged at a price before the game started, graded in the open afterwards. Wins and losses, never deleted. This page exists to be checked, not believed.
Everything below counts WNBA only, record since the restart (rebuilt after the Sep 2026 data loss — the earlier record is gone), in units. Change any of the three and every number on the page changes with it.
Heads up: WNBA’s earlier graded record was lost in a September 2026 data-loss incident and can no longer be audited. Everything here is the record rebuilt after that — not WNBA’s complete history, and never added to the lost one. See what was lost ↓
12−12
WNBA · Record since the restart · rebuilt after the Sep 2026 data loss — the earlier record is gone
WNBA’s earlier record was lost, and is not counted below
Before a September 2026 data-loss incident, the tracked WNBA record stood at 367–305–8 (+36.58u), as last recorded Sep 13, 2026. A publishing bug destroyed the underlying picks, so unlike the rest of this page we can no longer audit those figures play by play — and they are gone from the live board. Everything shown on this page is the WNBA record rebuilt after that loss: a fresh, smaller window — not that earlier history, and the two are never added together. This is the same restart the WNBA Today page explains.
Those last-known figures carry no ROI claim: WNBA was a labeled forward test, never a proven edge, and a lost, un-auditable record cannot become one. New guards now reject a publish that would shrink the graded record and stop a failed board read from overwriting what is stored. The record below this note is live and checkable play by play, the way the rest of the site is.
This season, and all-time
WNBA: the 2026 season, next to every season on record
Two windows, always both on screen. Once WNBA has more than one season logged, the prior ones live in the all-time row below, not in a reset scoreboard — this is a calendar year, not a model era (that split is further down, and the two are different axes over the same rows).
Window
W−L
Graded
Hit rate
Return on stake
Net units
2026 season37 rows logged this year
12−12
24
50.0%
−6.92%
−1.66u
Record since the restartthe rebuilt window — earlier WNBA history was lost
12−12
24
50.0%
−6.92%
−1.66u
Before the numbers
How to read this page
One sport at a time. You are looking at WNBA. Each sport is a different model on different markets and their records are never added together, not even to make a bigger number.
One era at a time, but all three are on screen. The headline counts the era in the switch above. The other two are in the table below it, and the first two add up to the third.
A rate needs a sample. Below 20 decided plays we show the raw won–lost and a dash instead of a percentage. That rule is applied to good samples and bad ones identically.
Colour is never the only signal. Every gain or loss carries an explicit + or − and a word. The page reads correctly in greyscale.
Any number that is not the headline says so. Every subset on this page states its own n, how that n relates to the headline’s n, and what happened to the rows it excludes. If you find one that does not, that is a bug and it is the worst kind we can ship.
Voids are not wins and not losses. A player who never played settles at 0 and stays on the record labelled as such. Nothing is deleted, ever.
The cutoffs, in full. The official WNBA record starts 2026-07-08; the current model era starts 2026-07-28. Anything before the first date is kept and shown but not counted — it was graded under rules we have since disowned. The excluded stretch is itemised at the foot of the era table, including when it helped us.
Return on stake is net divided by the total staked — a flat 1 unit on every graded play, at the price we locked, before any bonus, boost or fee. The denominator is the amount staked, not the number of plays, so the percentage is the same whether you read it in units or in dollars. It describes plays already graded. It is not a forecast and it is not annualised.
Eras
Three windows, all on screen at once
A model cutover starts a new era. The previous era stays published and unedited — a scoreboard you are allowed to reset is not a scoreboard. So rather than hide two of the three numbers behind the one that flatters us, all three sit in one table, and the top two add up to the bottom one. Pick a row to make it the headline.
The two eras add up to the record computed from 24 rows
✓This identity holds:12 + 0 = 12 wins
✓This identity holds:12 + 0 = 12 losses
✓This identity holds:24 + 0 = 24 graded plays
✓
The curve
Cumulative units, both eras, one axis
The whole official record on one line, with the model cutover drawn as a rule rather than as a fresh start. The shaded span is the era the headline above counts. The best and worst points are both labelled: a chart that only marks its peak is an advertisement.
Cumulative units across 2 graded days, Sep 29 to Sep 30, ending at −1.66u. One point per game day, evenly spaced — days with no games are not stretched out, so the horizontal axis is order, not calendar time. The line is the whole official record, both eras: the era the headline counts is shaded, and the cutover is drawn as a rule rather than as a restart, because restarting the chart at every recalibration is how a losing record disappears one cutover at a time. Every point here is also a row in the table below.
Day by day
Every day, and every pick inside it
One row per game day: won–lost, that day’s units, and the running total after it. Open a day to see the individual plays — the side we took, the price we took it at, how long before the game we took it, what we projected, and what actually happened. Collapsing a day never hides its result: the totals stay on the header either way.
4 game days · 24 graded plays · 1 void · 12 still open. The day totals add to −1.66u, the same figure as the headline.
Oct 2Fri0−00.00urunning −1.66u6 opencurrent model
Arike Ogunbowale›DAL vs GS · assists · priced 1d 4h before the gameUnder 3.5-136 at FanDuelproj 3.17 · not settled—no close until the game startsOpen—
The position, as logged
Our sideUnder 3.5 assists
Price we took-136 at FanDuel
Locked before the game1d 4h before the scheduled start
Splits
The same plays, cut four ways
Each split is an exhaustive partition of the plays in the current scope: the rows add to the headline’s W–L and to its units, and the table prints the total so you can see that they do. Rates are withheld below n=20 — and on a small sample almost every cell is withheld, which is the honest answer rather than a table of noise.
A descriptive split of a sample this size is a curiosity, not a finding. It is here so you can see where the result came from, not so we can claim a market we are good at.
Side we took
Plays
W−L
Hit rate
Return on stake
Net units
Contribution
Under
16
9−7
—
—
+0.58u
Over
8
3−5
—
—
−2.24u
All 2 groups
24
12−12
50.0%
−6.92%
−1.66u
This split partitions the headline exactly
Where the price came from
The same plays, at two definitions of “takeable”
Where the price came from — the same 24 settled tracked plays (bets we made, not measurement-only locks), all-time official record, read two ways
As logged-6.92%-1.66u12–12 · n=24every play, at the price we locked
Neither of these is “the real one.” The left column is the append-only record exactly as we logged it. The right column is the same plays restricted to prices takeable at a state-licensed US sportsbook or a CFTC-designated contract market (Novig, ProphetX) — what the record looks like if you can only bet where we would send you. They reconcile exactly: 24 = 22 + 2 excluded, worth +0.04u. Nothing is hidden and nothing is counted twice.
Unclassified2 plays+0.04upriced at a venue we have not classified
Going forward the play gate reads the US-regulated price, so we never tell you something is worth betting only at a venue you may not be able to use. The offshore number is still captured and still shown next to it, so this table keeps measuring exactly what that choice costs us — or saves us. Excluded plays are never deleted: they stay in the record, in the list below, and in the left column.
Subsets
Two numbers that are not the record
Both of these count a different set of rows from the headline, and that is exactly how a number stops reconciling and starts looking like a contradiction. So each one states its own n, how that n relates to the headline’s n, and what happened to the rows it leaves out.
At the book vs at Kalshi 11 of 24 plays
At the book
−0.42u
rate withheld — n=11
At Kalshi, fee included
−0.96u
rate withheld — n=11
Same plays, same results6−5 either way
What differsonly the price each venue paid
Kalshi fee applied0.07 × p × (1−p) per contract, rounded up to the cent
and it reconciles to the headline
✓This identity holds:11 comparable + 13 with no fillable Kalshi price = 24 graded plays
✓This identity holds:−0.42u + −1.24u = −1.66u, the headline net
Only 11 decided plays here, so no rate is quoted — the same n=20 gate the headline uses. What the raw units do say is that these 11 plays carry −0.42u of the era’s −1.66u, so a handful of results is a large share of the movement. That is exactly why a percentage off them would be worthless. Kalshi charges no sportsbook vig but we line-shop across many books, so the book beating the exchange is a finding, not a bug.
Closing line value, on the tracked plays 21 of 24 plays
−0.18%
average, in probability points, against where our side closed · beat the close on 9 of 21
why 21 and not 24
Nothing settles at “never happened”
Voids, pushes and the plays still open
Rows that could not win or lose money. They are not in the W–L and not in the return, because no stake was ever at risk on them — and they are not deleted, because “we took this line” is the claim, and the claim stands whether or not the player played. Every count here is scoped to the era selected above, the same as the headline.
Voids — nobody could win or lose 1 row
1 settled at 0.00u
WNBA · all-time official record
ruled out before the game — never played1
✓This identity holds:24 graded + 1 void + 12 open = 37 rows we logged in this scope
The voids are in that total and not in the headline’s 24. Counting a scratch as a win would be a lie; deleting it would be a different one.
Where we cannot name the reason precisely we say “no action” rather than guess “did not play”. A postponed game is not a player sitting out, and a label that is only probably true has no business on a record page.
Pushes and open plays
Pushes (landed exactly on the number)0
Logged, game not finished12
Measurement-only picks (never in this record)205
There are no pushes in this scope — every line we took was a half-number, so nothing could land exactly on it. The row is printed anyway: a zero you can see is worth more than a category that quietly does not exist.
The 205 measurement-only picks are model-qualified numbers we take a price on and grade purely to measure ourselves faster. They have their own wins and losses and none of them count here, good or bad. They are the reason the closing-line-value sample on the audit page is bigger than this record.
The promise
Append-only, and here is what that costs us
“Append-only” is easy to write and hard to prove. The proof is that the worst things that have happened to us are still on this page, at full size, in the same type as the good ones.
Logged before the game, every time
✓ 24 / 24
plays whose price was locked strictly before the scheduled start
earliestgame startstightest 11h 59m
Earliest1d 5h before
Median22h 33m before
Tightest11h 59m before
This is the claim the whole record rests on, so it is measured rather than asserted: for every play we hold the moment we locked the price and the scheduled start, and the gap is checked on every single one. The tightest was 11h 59m.
The worst of it, at full size
Worst dayWed, Sep 30 · 5−7
…that day cost−2.77u
Longest losing run4 plays in a row
Deepest drawdown from a peak−4.73u
Best dayTue, Sep 29 · 7−5
…that day made+1.11u
Both directions, same type size, same panel. A record page that can tell you its best day and not its worst one is an advertisement with a table in it. Every one of these days is expandable in the ledger above — the bad ones are not archived any deeper than the good ones.
Don’t take our word for it
Check the arithmetic
Every identity this page relies on, re-derived from the raw rows. If a subset near a headline cannot be reconciled with the headline, that is the worst bug this product can ship — so these are printed rather than promised, and a failing one renders as a failure on the page instead of quietly disappearing.
✓ 14 of 14 checks passed · re-derived from 37 rows in this scope
✓Passed:the eras partition the record — 12−12 + 0−0 = 12−12
✓Passed:era units add up — −1.66u + 0.00u = −1.66u
✓Passed:era counts add up — 24 + 0 = 24 graded plays
✓Passed:the market split partitions all 24 plays and −1.66u exactly
✓Passed:the side split partitions all 24 plays and −1.66u exactly
✓Passed:the book split partitions all 24 plays and −1.66u exactly
✓Passed:the how early we bet split partitions all 24 plays and −1.66u exactly
✓Passed:the at-Kalshi subset plus the plays it excludes equals the headline, in count AND in units
✓Passed:every graded play has exactly one CLV status — 21 counted, 3 the book moved the line
✓Passed:the CLV legs telescope — +0.14% waiting + −0.04% drift = +0.10% raw
Past results are a record of what happened, not a forecast. No ROI claim is made anywhere on this page: a return figure here describes plays already graded, and the sample is far short of the several thousand it would take to separate skill from variance. See every play in this record, day by day →
24 graded plays
50.0%
Hit rate12 of 24 decided
−1.66u
Net unitsflat 1u a play
−6.92%
Return on stakenet ÷ 24.00u staked
12 · 1 void
Still openlogged, not yet graded
− WNBA is behind Over 24 graded WNBA plays in this era we are down −1.66u. That is the first number on the page and it stays the first number on the page. The other two windows are not hidden: the record since the restart is 12−12 at −1.66u, and the previous model is 0−0 at 0.00u. Records are never blended across sports — different models, different markets, different start dates; one combined figure would be a number we invented.
This identity holds:
−1.66u + 0.00u = −1.66u
First price we ever saw-136
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection3.17 assists
The market’s line3.5
Probability we displayed57.5%
Actualpending
Settlednot yet
This play is logged and priced. It will settle here, win or lose, and it will not move.
Closing line value
Not measurable on this row — no usable closing quote was captured before the game. It is shown as unmeasurable rather than as zero, because those are different statements.
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Awak Kuier›DAL vs GS · rebounds · priced 1d 4h before the gameUnder 4.5+122 at FanDuelproj 3.58 · not settled—no close until the game startsOpen—
The position, as logged
Our sideUnder 4.5 rebounds
Price we took+122 at FanDuel
Locked before the game1d 4h before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw+122
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection3.58 rebounds
The market’s line4.5
Probability we displayed48.8%
Actualpending
Settlednot yet
This play is logged and priced. It will settle here, win or lose, and it will not move.
Closing line value
Not measurable on this row — no usable closing quote was captured before the game. It is shown as unmeasurable rather than as zero, because those are different statements.
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Aziaha James›DAL vs GS · points · priced 1d 4h before the gameUnder 5.5-106 at FanDuelproj 4.17 · not settled—no close until the game startsOpen—
The position, as logged
Our sideUnder 5.5 points
Price we took-106 at FanDuel
Locked before the game1d 4h before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw-106
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection4.17 points
The market’s line5.5
Probability we displayed58.4%
Actualpending
Settlednot yet
This play is logged and priced. It will settle here, win or lose, and it will not move.
Closing line value
Not measurable on this row — no usable closing quote was captured before the game. It is shown as unmeasurable rather than as zero, because those are different statements.
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Gabby Williams›GS vs DAL · rebounds · priced 1d 4h before the gameUnder 3.5+111 at DraftKingsproj 3.03 · not settled—no close until the game startsOpen—
The position, as logged
Our sideUnder 3.5 rebounds
Price we took+111 at DraftKings
Locked before the game1d 4h before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw+111
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection3.03 rebounds
The market’s line3.5
Probability we displayed52.3%
Actualpending
Settlednot yet
This play is logged and priced. It will settle here, win or lose, and it will not move.
Closing line value
Not measurable on this row — no usable closing quote was captured before the game. It is shown as unmeasurable rather than as zero, because those are different statements.
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Janelle Salaun›GS vs DAL · points · priced 1d 4h before the gameUnder 10.5-110 at DraftKingsproj 9.59 · not settled—no close until the game startsOpen—
The position, as logged
Our sideUnder 10.5 points
Price we took-110 at DraftKings
Locked before the game1d 4h before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw-110
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection9.59 points
The market’s line10.5
Probability we displayed52.8%
Actualpending
Settlednot yet
This play is logged and priced. It will settle here, win or lose, and it will not move.
Closing line value
Not measurable on this row — no usable closing quote was captured before the game. It is shown as unmeasurable rather than as zero, because those are different statements.
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Kayla Thornton›GS vs DAL · threes · priced 1d 4h before the gameUnder 1.5-127 at DraftKingsproj 0.6 · not settled—no close until the game startsOpen—
The position, as logged
Our sideUnder 1.5 threes
Price we took-127 at DraftKings
Locked before the game1d 4h before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw-127
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection0.6 threes
The market’s line1.5
Probability we displayed61.2%
Actualpending
Settlednot yet
This play is logged and priced. It will settle here, win or lose, and it will not move.
Closing line value
Not measurable on this row — no usable closing quote was captured before the game. It is shown as unmeasurable rather than as zero, because those are different statements.
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Oct 1Thu0−00.00urunning −1.66u1 void6 opencurrent model
Stephanie Talbot›LV vs IND · points · priced 1d 4h before the gameUnder 5.5-104 at FanDuelproj 4.33−2.00%CLV vs closeDNP0.00u
The position, as logged
Our sideUnder 5.5 points
Price we took-104 at FanDuel
Locked before the game1d 4h before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw-104
Where our side closed+102
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection4.33 points
The market’s line5.5
Probability we displayed60.0%
Actualnever played
Settled0.00u
DNP — ruled out before the game — never played. No stake was ever at risk, so it settles at zero and sits in neither the wins nor the losses. It stays on the record because we did take this line, and that is the claim.
Closing line value
CLV — the number we publish−2.00%
Basisde-vigged, both sides frozen at lock
Raw close vs our price−1.48%
…of which: waiting paid0.00%
…of which: market drift−1.48%
Positive means we locked a better number than the market settled at. It can be negative and it is shown when it is. Beating the close and still losing is normal, and so is winning at a worse price than the close. Never read it as a return: break-even is roughly half the hold we paid, about +2.25 points.
Why two numbers. The two legs telescope to the raw figure (0.00% + −1.48% = −1.48%), because an opening quote for the other side was never captured and only raw prices can be chained. The −2.00% above is the de-vigged number, which strips the book’s margin off both ends. They differ by the change in that margin, and we never average them together.
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Aja Wilson›LV vs IND · rebounds · priced 1d 4h before the gameUnder 10.5+100 at ESPN BETproj 9.82 · not settled−2.18%CLV vs closeOpen—
The position, as logged
Our sideUnder 10.5 rebounds
Price we took+100 at ESPN BET
Locked before the game1d 4h before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw+100
Where our side closed+104
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection9.82 rebounds
The market’s line10.5
Probability we displayed53.8%
Actualpending
Settlednot yet
This play is logged and priced. It will settle here, win or lose, and it will not move.
Closing line value
CLV — the number we publish−2.18%
Basisde-vigged, both sides frozen at lock
Raw close vs our price
Aliyah Boston›IND vs LV · points · priced 1d 4h before the gameUnder 15.5+102 at betPARXproj 16.2 · not settled—no close until the game startsOpen—
The position, as logged
Our sideUnder 15.5 points
Price we took+102 at betPARX
Locked before the game1d 4h before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw+102
Where our side closed-110 on 16.5
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection16.2 points
The market’s line15.5
Probability we displayed53.6%
Actualpending
Settlednot yet
This play is logged and priced. It will settle here, win or lose, and it will not move.
Closing line value
Not measurable on this row — the book moved the line, so our price and the close are quotes on two different bets. It is shown as unmeasurable rather than as zero, because those are different statements.
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Cheyenne Parkertyus›LV vs IND · points · priced 1d 4h before the gameUnder 5.5-125 at DraftKingsproj 4.75 · not settled—no close until the game startsOpen—
The position, as logged
Our sideUnder 5.5 points
Price we took-125 at DraftKings
Locked before the game1d 4h before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw-125
Where our side closed-125 on 7.5
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection4.75 points
The market’s line5.5
Probability we displayed50.2%
Actualpending
Settlednot yet
This play is logged and priced. It will settle here, win or lose, and it will not move.
Closing line value
Not measurable on this row — the book moved the line, so our price and the close are quotes on two different bets. It is shown as unmeasurable rather than as zero, because those are different statements.
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Kelsey Mitchell›IND vs LV · assists · priced 1d 4h before the gameOver 2.5+100 at polymarketproj 2.75 · not settled−0.81%CLV vs closeOpen—
The position, as logged
Our sideOver 2.5 assists
Price we took+100 at polymarket
Locked before the game1d 4h before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw+100
Where our side closed+105
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection2.75 assists
The market’s line2.5
Probability we displayed50.1%
Actualpending
Settlednot yet
This play is logged and priced. It will settle here, win or lose, and it will not move.
Closing line value
CLV — the number we publish−0.81%
Basisde-vigged, both sides frozen at lock
Lexie Hull›IND vs LV · threes · priced 11h 59m before the gameUnder 0.5+102 at ProphetXproj 0.2 · not settled−0.76%CLV vs closeOpen—
The position, as logged
Our sideUnder 0.5 threes
Price we took+102 at ProphetX
Locked before the game11h 59m before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw+100
Where our side closed+106
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection0.2 threes
The market’s line0.5
Probability we displayed54.6%
Actualpending
Settlednot yet
This play is logged and priced. It will settle here, win or lose, and it will not move.
Closing line value
CLV — the number we publish−0.76%
Basisde-vigged, both sides frozen at lock
Raw close vs our price
Raven Johnson›IND vs LV · rebounds · priced 1d 4h before the gameUnder 2.5-155 at Hard Rock Betproj 1.38 · not settled−3.52%CLV vs closeOpen—
The position, as logged
Our sideUnder 2.5 rebounds
Price we took-155 at Hard Rock Bet
Locked before the game1d 4h before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw-155
Where our side closed-134
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection1.38 rebounds
The market’s line2.5
Probability we displayed67.9%
Actualpending
Settlednot yet
This play is logged and priced. It will settle here, win or lose, and it will not move.
Closing line value
CLV — the number we publish−3.52%
Basisraw price-to-price
Raw close vs our price
Sep 30Wed5−7−2.77urunning −1.66ucurrent model
Arike Ogunbowale›DAL vs GS · PRA · priced 12h before the gameOver 20.5+100 at ProphetXproj 21.3 → 56not measurablethe book moved the line✓ Won+1.00u
The position, as logged
Our sideOver 20.5 PRA
Price we took+100 at ProphetX
Locked before the game12h before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw-102
Where our side closed-130 on 19.5
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection21.3 PRA
The market’s line20.5
Probability we displayed51.2%
Actual56 PRA
Settled+1.00u
Graded from the box score at the price we took — never at a better price found afterwards. This row is permanent: positions settle, they never disappear.
Closing line value
Not measurable on this row — the book moved the line, so our price and the close are quotes on two different bets. It is shown as unmeasurable rather than as zero, because those are different statements.
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Angel Reese›ATL vs WAS · assists · priced 1d 5h before the gameUnder 2.5-105 at DraftKingsproj 2 → 2+4.89%CLV vs close✓ Won+0.95u
The position, as logged
Our sideUnder 2.5 assists
Price we took-105 at DraftKings
Locked before the game1d 5h before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw-105
Where our side closed-129
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection2 assists
The market’s line2.5
Probability we displayed59.5%
Actual2 assists
Settled+0.95u
Graded from the box score at the price we took — never at a better price found afterwards. This row is permanent: positions settle, they never disappear.
Closing line value
CLV — the number we publish+4.89%
Basisde-vigged, both sides frozen at lock
Shakira Austin›WAS vs ATL · rebounds · priced 1d 5h before the gameUnder 10.5-108 at DraftKingsproj 9.27 → 3−0.92%CLV vs close✓ Won+0.93u
The position, as logged
Our sideUnder 10.5 rebounds
Price we took-108 at DraftKings
Locked before the game1d 5h before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw-108
Where our side closed-104
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection9.27 rebounds
The market’s line10.5
Probability we displayed54.4%
Actual3 rebounds
Settled+0.93u
Graded from the box score at the price we took — never at a better price found afterwards. This row is permanent: positions settle, they never disappear.
Closing line value
CLV — the number we publish−0.92%
Basisde-vigged, both sides frozen at lock
Paige Bueckers›DAL vs GS · rebounds · priced 1d 4h before the gameOver 3.5-139 at Caesarsproj 4.21 → 4not measurablethe book moved the line✓ Won+0.72u
The position, as logged
Our sideOver 3.5 rebounds
Price we took-139 at Caesars
Locked before the game1d 4h before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw-139
Where our side closed+124 on 4.5
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection4.21 rebounds
The market’s line3.5
Probability we displayed61.9%
Actual4 rebounds
Settled+0.72u
Graded from the box score at the price we took — never at a better price found afterwards. This row is permanent: positions settle, they never disappear.
Closing line value
Not measurable on this row — the book moved the line, so our price and the close are quotes on two different bets. It is shown as unmeasurable rather than as zero, because those are different statements.
Exchange cross-check
Cecilia Zandalasini›GS vs DAL · threes · priced 1d 4h before the gameUnder 1.5-159 at betPARXproj 0.69 → 1−1.07%CLV vs close✓ Won+0.63u
The position, as logged
Our sideUnder 1.5 threes
Price we took-159 at betPARX
Locked before the game1d 4h before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw-159
Where our side closed-155
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection0.69 threes
The market’s line1.5
Probability we displayed64.9%
Actual1 threes
Settled+0.63u
Graded from the box score at the price we took — never at a better price found afterwards. This row is permanent: positions settle, they never disappear.
Closing line value
CLV — the number we publish−1.07%
Basisde-vigged, both sides frozen at lock
Aziaha James›DAL vs GS · points · priced 1d 4h before the gameUnder 4.5-113 at ProphetXproj 4.29 → 13+2.61%CLV vs close✗ Lost−1.00u
The position, as logged
Our sideUnder 4.5 points
Price we took-113 at ProphetX
Locked before the game1d 4h before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw-113
Where our side closed-125
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection4.29 points
The market’s line4.5
Probability we displayed57.1%
Actual13 points
Settled−1.00u
Graded from the box score at the price we took — never at a better price found afterwards. This row is permanent: positions settle, they never disappear.
Closing line value
CLV — the number we publish+2.61%
Basisde-vigged, both sides frozen at lock
Dewanna Bonner›ATL vs WAS · rebounds · priced 1d 5h before the gameOver 5.5+126 at ProphetXproj 6.46 → 2not measurablethe book moved the line✗ Lost−1.00u
The position, as logged
Our sideOver 5.5 rebounds
Price we took+126 at ProphetX
Locked before the game1d 5h before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw+126
Where our side closed-120 on 4.5
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection6.46 rebounds
The market’s line5.5
Probability we displayed63.6%
Actual2 rebounds
Settled−1.00u
Graded from the box score at the price we took — never at a better price found afterwards. This row is permanent: positions settle, they never disappear.
Closing line value
Not measurable on this row — the book moved the line, so our price and the close are quotes on two different bets. It is shown as unmeasurable rather than as zero, because those are different statements.
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Gabby Williams›GS vs DAL · threes · priced 1d 4h before the gameUnder 1.5+115 at Novigproj 1.03 → 5−3.23%CLV vs close✗ Lost−1.00u
The position, as logged
Our sideUnder 1.5 threes
Price we took+115 at Novig
Locked before the game1d 4h before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw+115
Where our side closed+127
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection1.03 threes
The market’s line1.5
Probability we displayed48.4%
Actual5 threes
Settled−1.00u
Graded from the box score at the price we took — never at a better price found afterwards. This row is permanent: positions settle, they never disappear.
Closing line value
CLV — the number we publish−3.23%
Basisde-vigged, both sides frozen at lock
Jordin Canada›ATL vs WAS · rebounds · priced 1d 5h before the gameUnder 3.5-157 at Caesarsproj 2.95 → 7−0.44%CLV vs close✗ Lost−1.00u
The position, as logged
Our sideUnder 3.5 rebounds
Price we took-157 at Caesars
Locked before the game1d 5h before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw-157
Where our side closed-150
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection2.95 rebounds
The market’s line3.5
Probability we displayed62.5%
Actual7 rebounds
Settled−1.00u
Graded from the box score at the price we took — never at a better price found afterwards. This row is permanent: positions settle, they never disappear.
Closing line value
CLV — the number we publish−0.44%
Basisde-vigged, both sides frozen at lock
Naz Hillmon›ATL vs WAS · rebounds · priced 1d 5h before the gameOver 3.5+120 at DraftKingsproj 4.31 → 3+1.39%CLV vs close✗ Lost−1.00u
The position, as logged
Our sideOver 3.5 rebounds
Price we took+120 at DraftKings
Locked before the game1d 5h before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw+120
Where our side closed+108
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection4.31 rebounds
The market’s line3.5
Probability we displayed48.7%
Actual3 rebounds
Settled−1.00u
Graded from the box score at the price we took — never at a better price found afterwards. This row is permanent: positions settle, they never disappear.
Closing line value
CLV — the number we publish+1.39%
Basisde-vigged, both sides frozen at lock
Sonia Citron›WAS vs ATL · points · priced 1d 5h before the gameUnder 15.5+111 at Novigproj 14.23 → 25−1.44%CLV vs close✗ Lost−1.00u
The position, as logged
Our sideUnder 15.5 points
Price we took+111 at Novig
Locked before the game1d 5h before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw+111
Where our side closed+113
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection14.23 points
The market’s line15.5
Probability we displayed50.6%
Actual25 points
Settled−1.00u
Graded from the box score at the price we took — never at a better price found afterwards. This row is permanent: positions settle, they never disappear.
Closing line value
CLV — the number we publish−1.44%
Basisde-vigged, both sides frozen at lock
Veronica Burton›GS vs DAL · threes · priced 1d 4h before the gameUnder 1.5-150 at Hard Rock Betproj 0.69 → 2−3.40%CLV vs close✗ Lost−1.00u
The position, as logged
Our sideUnder 1.5 threes
Price we took-150 at Hard Rock Bet
Locked before the game1d 4h before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw-150
Where our side closed-128
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection0.69 threes
The market’s line1.5
Probability we displayed65.0%
Actual2 threes
Settled−1.00u
Graded from the box score at the price we took — never at a better price found afterwards. This row is permanent: positions settle, they never disappear.
Closing line value
CLV — the number we publish−3.40%
Basisde-vigged, both sides frozen at lock
Sep 29Tue7−5+1.11urunning +1.11ucurrent model
Jonquel Jones›NY vs MIN · points · priced 22h 33m before the gameOver 13.5+104 at polymarketproj 13.91 → 21+0.42%CLV vs close✓ Won+1.04u
The position, as logged
Our sideOver 13.5 points
Price we took+104 at polymarket
Locked before the game22h 33m before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw+104
Where our side closed-101
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection13.91 points
The market’s line13.5
Probability we displayed50.9%
Actual21 points
Settled+1.04u
Graded from the box score at the price we took — never at a better price found afterwards. This row is permanent: positions settle, they never disappear.
Closing line value
CLV — the number we publish+0.42%
Basisde-vigged, both sides frozen at lock
Raw close vs our price+1.23%
…of which: waiting paid0.00%
…of which: market drift+1.23%
Positive means we locked a better number than the market settled at. It can be negative and it is shown when it is. Beating the close and still losing is normal, and so is winning at a worse price than the close. Never read it as a return: break-even is roughly half the hold we paid, about +2.25 points.
Why two numbers. The two legs telescope to the raw figure (0.00% + +1.23% = +1.23%), because an opening quote for the other side was never captured and only raw prices can be chained. The +0.42% above is the de-vigged number, which strips the book’s margin off both ends. They differ by the change in that margin, and we never average them together.
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Natasha Howard›MIN vs NY · points · priced 22h 33m before the gameUnder 10.5+102 at Novigproj 9.46 → 2+2.25%CLV vs close✓ Won+1.02u
The position, as logged
Our sideUnder 10.5 points
Price we took+102 at Novig
Locked before the game22h 33m before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw+102
Where our side closed-111
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection9.46 points
The market’s line10.5
Probability we displayed50.4%
Actual2 points
Settled+1.02u
Graded from the box score at the price we took — never at a better price found afterwards. This row is permanent: positions settle, they never disappear.
Closing line value
CLV — the number we publish+2.25%
Basisde-vigged, both sides frozen at lock
Aliyah Boston›IND vs LV · rebounds · priced 20h 33m before the gameUnder 8.5+100 at DraftKingsproj 7.05 → 4+4.55%CLV vs close✓ Won+1.00u
The position, as logged
Our sideUnder 8.5 rebounds
Price we took+100 at DraftKings
Locked before the game20h 33m before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw+100
Where our side closed-120
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection7.05 rebounds
The market’s line8.5
Probability we displayed56.0%
Actual4 rebounds
Settled+1.00u
Graded from the box score at the price we took — never at a better price found afterwards. This row is permanent: positions settle, they never disappear.
Closing line value
CLV — the number we publish+4.55%
Basisraw price-to-price
Pauline Astier›NY vs MIN · assists · priced 22h 33m before the gameUnder 3.5-125 at Hard Rock Betproj 3 → 3−2.35%CLV vs close✓ Won+0.80u
The position, as logged
Our sideUnder 3.5 assists
Price we took-125 at Hard Rock Bet
Locked before the game22h 33m before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw-125
Where our side closed-120
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection3 assists
The market’s line3.5
Probability we displayed58.4%
Actual3 assists
Settled+0.80u
Graded from the box score at the price we took — never at a better price found afterwards. This row is permanent: positions settle, they never disappear.
Closing line value
CLV — the number we publish−2.35%
Basisde-vigged, both sides frozen at lock
Jackie Young›LV vs IND · rebounds · priced 20h 33m before the gameUnder 4.5-130 at ESPN BETproj 3.57 → 4−1.56%CLV vs close✓ Won+0.77u
The position, as logged
Our sideUnder 4.5 rebounds
Price we took-130 at ESPN BET
Locked before the game20h 33m before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw-130
Where our side closed-123
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection3.57 rebounds
The market’s line4.5
Probability we displayed57.6%
Actual4 rebounds
Settled+0.77u
Graded from the box score at the price we took — never at a better price found afterwards. This row is permanent: positions settle, they never disappear.
Closing line value
CLV — the number we publish−1.56%
Basisde-vigged, both sides frozen at lock
Napheesa Collier›MIN vs NY · rebounds · priced 22h 33m before the gameUnder 7.5-130 at betPARXproj 6.15 → 7−1.33%CLV vs close✓ Won+0.77u
The position, as logged
Our sideUnder 7.5 rebounds
Price we took-130 at betPARX
Locked before the game22h 33m before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw-130
Where our side closed-124
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection6.15 rebounds
The market’s line7.5
Probability we displayed62.6%
Actual7 rebounds
Settled+0.77u
Graded from the box score at the price we took — never at a better price found afterwards. This row is permanent: positions settle, they never disappear.
Closing line value
CLV — the number we publish−1.33%
Basisde-vigged, both sides frozen at lock
Chelsea Gray›LV vs IND · rebounds · priced 20h 33m before the gameUnder 3.5-140 at ESPN BETproj 2.32 → 1−0.92%CLV vs close✓ Won+0.71u
The position, as logged
Our sideUnder 3.5 rebounds
Price we took-140 at ESPN BET
Locked before the game20h 33m before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw-140
Where our side closed-138
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection2.32 rebounds
The market’s line3.5
Probability we displayed62.2%
Actual1 rebounds
Settled+0.71u
Graded from the box score at the price we took — never at a better price found afterwards. This row is permanent: positions settle, they never disappear.
Closing line value
CLV — the number we publish−0.92%
Basisde-vigged, both sides frozen at lock
Caitlin Clark›IND vs LV · rebounds · priced 20h 33m before the gameUnder 4.5-127 at ProphetXproj 4.01 → 70.00%CLV vs close✗ Lost−1.00u
The position, as logged
Our sideUnder 4.5 rebounds
Price we took-127 at ProphetX
Locked before the game20h 33m before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw-127
Where our side closed-127
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection4.01 rebounds
The market’s line4.5
Probability we displayed58.8%
Actual7 rebounds
Settled−1.00u
Graded from the box score at the price we took — never at a better price found afterwards. This row is permanent: positions settle, they never disappear.
Closing line value
CLV — the number we publish0.00%
Basisraw price-to-price
Kelsey Mitchell›IND vs LV · rebounds · priced 20h 33m before the gameOver 1.5-133 at polymarketproj 2.57 → 1+0.27%CLV vs close✗ Lost−1.00u
The position, as logged
Our sideOver 1.5 rebounds
Price we took-133 at polymarket
Locked before the game20h 33m before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw-133
Where our side closed-132
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection2.57 rebounds
The market’s line1.5
Probability we displayed57.7%
Actual1 rebounds
Settled−1.00u
Graded from the box score at the price we took — never at a better price found afterwards. This row is permanent: positions settle, they never disappear.
Closing line value
CLV — the number we publish+0.27%
Basisde-vigged, both sides frozen at lock
Makayla Timpson›IND vs LV · points · priced 11h 59m before the gameOver 6.5+110 at ProphetXproj 6.89 → 6−6.64%CLV vs close✗ Lost−1.00u
The position, as logged
Our sideOver 6.5 points
Price we took+110 at ProphetX
Locked before the game11h 59m before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw-102
Where our side closed+144
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection6.89 points
The market’s line6.5
Probability we displayed45.0%
Actual6 points
Settled−1.00u
Graded from the box score at the price we took — never at a better price found afterwards. This row is permanent: positions settle, they never disappear.
Closing line value
CLV — the number we publish−6.64%
Basisraw price-to-price
Olivia Miles›MIN vs NY · points · priced 22h 33m before the gameOver 18.5+100 at BetRiversproj 19.01 → 5+0.70%CLV vs close✗ Lost−1.00u
The position, as logged
Our sideOver 18.5 points
Price we took+100 at BetRivers
Locked before the game22h 33m before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw+100
Where our side closed-104
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection19.01 points
The market’s line18.5
Probability we displayed50.0%
Actual5 points
Settled−1.00u
Graded from the box score at the price we took — never at a better price found afterwards. This row is permanent: positions settle, they never disappear.
Closing line value
CLV — the number we publish+0.70%
Basisde-vigged, both sides frozen at lock
Sabrina Ionescu›NY vs MIN · rebounds · priced 22h 33m before the gameUnder 3.5+128 at FanDuelproj 2.98 → 4+2.42%CLV vs close✗ Lost−1.00u
The position, as logged
Our sideUnder 3.5 rebounds
Price we took+128 at FanDuel
Locked before the game22h 33m before the scheduled start
First price we ever saw+128
Where our side closed+118
What we projected, and what happened
Our projection2.98 rebounds
The market’s line3.5
Probability we displayed50.6%
Actual4 rebounds
Settled−1.00u
Graded from the box score at the price we took — never at a better price found afterwards. This row is permanent: positions settle, they never disappear.
Closing line value
CLV — the number we publish+2.42%
Basisde-vigged, both sides frozen at lock
2 groups
✓This identity holds:24 plays across the groups = 24 in the headline
✓This identity holds:12−12 across the groups = 12−12 in the headline
✓This identity holds:−1.66u across the groups = −1.66u in the headline
2 of 2 groups are under 20 decided plays, so their hit rate and return are withheld. The raw won–lost and the units are still shown, because those are counts, not rates.
✓
21 counted above
–3 the book moved the line, so our price and the close are quotes on two different bets
✓This identity holds:21 + 3 = 24 graded plays in this scope
All three legs are raw price-to-price, which is the only way they telescope. The headline above is the de-vigged number on the 18 of 21 rows where we froze both sides at lock — a different, better-behaved measurement, and never averaged together with these.
Never read closing line value as a return. Beating the close by less than the margin we paid to get there still loses money: break-even is roughly half the hold, about +2.25 points. The figure above is below that line.
This is the CLV of the plays in this record, and it is not the only CLV number we publish: the wider pool of every price we ever locked — including model-qualified picks we price purely to measure ourselves and never bet — is itemised on the CLV audit. Both are real and they answer different questions, which is why they are never averaged into one.
What would prove this page wrong. A play that appears here today and is gone tomorrow; a loss that changes to a void; a start date that moves after a bad week; a subset whose n cannot be reconciled with the headline’s n. The CSV below is downloadable and diffable precisely so those are checkable rather than promised.
✓
Passed:
all 24 timestamped plays were priced before the game started
✓Passed:all 1 void settle at exactly 0 — none of them moves the record
✓Passed:every logged row still carries its date and its outcome
✓Passed:the rate gate is n=20, the same constant every StatIQ surface uses
What this page deliberately does not do. It does not score the probability we published against what happened, and it does not repeat the backtests — that is the model report card, and printing the same calibration table in two places is how two surfaces start to disagree. Likewise the itemised list of every price we ever locked, including the measurement-only ones that are not in this record, is the CLV audit. This page answers exactly one question: what happened to the plays we published?
−0.98%
…of which: waiting paid0.00%
…of which: market drift−0.98%
Positive means we locked a better number than the market settled at. It can be negative and it is shown when it is. Beating the close and still losing is normal, and so is winning at a worse price than the close. Never read it as a return: break-even is roughly half the hold we paid, about +2.25 points.
Why two numbers. The two legs telescope to the raw figure (0.00% + −0.98% = −0.98%), because an opening quote for the other side was never captured and only raw prices can be chained. The −2.18% above is the de-vigged number, which strips the book’s margin off both ends. They differ by the change in that margin, and we never average them together.
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Raw close vs our price
−1.22%
…of which: waiting paid0.00%
…of which: market drift−1.22%
Positive means we locked a better number than the market settled at. It can be negative and it is shown when it is. Beating the close and still losing is normal, and so is winning at a worse price than the close. Never read it as a return: break-even is roughly half the hold we paid, about +2.25 points.
Why two numbers. The two legs telescope to the raw figure (0.00% + −1.22% = −1.22%), because an opening quote for the other side was never captured and only raw prices can be chained. The −0.81% above is the de-vigged number, which strips the book’s margin off both ends. They differ by the change in that margin, and we never average them together.
Exchange cross-check
Kalshi ask, pre-game51¢
With Kalshi’s fee53¢
Counted in the price comparisonyes
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
−0.96%
…of which: waiting paid+0.50%
…of which: market drift−1.46%
Positive means we locked a better number than the market settled at. It can be negative and it is shown when it is. Beating the close and still losing is normal, and so is winning at a worse price than the close. Never read it as a return: break-even is roughly half the hold we paid, about +2.25 points.
Why two numbers. The two legs telescope to the raw figure (+0.50% + −1.46% = −0.96%), because an opening quote for the other side was never captured and only raw prices can be chained. The −0.76% above is the de-vigged number, which strips the book’s margin off both ends. They differ by the change in that margin, and we never average them together.
Exchange cross-check
Kalshi ask, pre-game50¢
With Kalshi’s fee52¢
Counted in the price comparisonyes
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
−3.52%
…of which: waiting paid0.00%
…of which: market drift−3.52%
Positive means we locked a better number than the market settled at. It can be negative and it is shown when it is. Beating the close and still losing is normal, and so is winning at a worse price than the close. Never read it as a return: break-even is roughly half the hold we paid, about +2.25 points.
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Raw close vs our price+5.11%
…of which: waiting paid0.00%
…of which: market drift+5.11%
Positive means we locked a better number than the market settled at. It can be negative and it is shown when it is. Beating the close and still losing is normal, and so is winning at a worse price than the close. Never read it as a return: break-even is roughly half the hold we paid, about +2.25 points.
Why two numbers. The two legs telescope to the raw figure (0.00% + +5.11% = +5.11%), because an opening quote for the other side was never captured and only raw prices can be chained. The +4.89% above is the de-vigged number, which strips the book’s margin off both ends. They differ by the change in that margin, and we never average them together.
Exchange cross-check
Kalshi ask, pre-game53¢
With Kalshi’s fee55¢
Counted in the price comparisonyes
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Raw close vs our price−0.94%
…of which: waiting paid0.00%
…of which: market drift−0.94%
Positive means we locked a better number than the market settled at. It can be negative and it is shown when it is. Beating the close and still losing is normal, and so is winning at a worse price than the close. Never read it as a return: break-even is roughly half the hold we paid, about +2.25 points.
Why two numbers. The two legs telescope to the raw figure (0.00% + −0.94% = −0.94%), because an opening quote for the other side was never captured and only raw prices can be chained. The −0.92% above is the de-vigged number, which strips the book’s margin off both ends. They differ by the change in that margin, and we never average them together.
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Kalshi ask, pre-game59¢
With Kalshi’s fee61¢
Counted in the price comparisonyes
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Raw close vs our price−0.61%
…of which: waiting paid0.00%
…of which: market drift−0.61%
Positive means we locked a better number than the market settled at. It can be negative and it is shown when it is. Beating the close and still losing is normal, and so is winning at a worse price than the close. Never read it as a return: break-even is roughly half the hold we paid, about +2.25 points.
Why two numbers. The two legs telescope to the raw figure (0.00% + −0.61% = −0.61%), because an opening quote for the other side was never captured and only raw prices can be chained. The −1.07% above is the de-vigged number, which strips the book’s margin off both ends. They differ by the change in that margin, and we never average them together.
Exchange cross-check
Kalshi ask, pre-game60¢
With Kalshi’s fee62¢
Counted in the price comparisonyes
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Raw close vs our price+2.50%
…of which: waiting paid0.00%
…of which: market drift+2.50%
Positive means we locked a better number than the market settled at. It can be negative and it is shown when it is. Beating the close and still losing is normal, and so is winning at a worse price than the close. Never read it as a return: break-even is roughly half the hold we paid, about +2.25 points.
Why two numbers. The two legs telescope to the raw figure (0.00% + +2.50% = +2.50%), because an opening quote for the other side was never captured and only raw prices can be chained. The +2.61% above is the de-vigged number, which strips the book’s margin off both ends. They differ by the change in that margin, and we never average them together.
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Raw close vs our price−2.46%
…of which: waiting paid0.00%
…of which: market drift−2.46%
Positive means we locked a better number than the market settled at. It can be negative and it is shown when it is. Beating the close and still losing is normal, and so is winning at a worse price than the close. Never read it as a return: break-even is roughly half the hold we paid, about +2.25 points.
Why two numbers. The two legs telescope to the raw figure (0.00% + −2.46% = −2.46%), because an opening quote for the other side was never captured and only raw prices can be chained. The −3.23% above is the de-vigged number, which strips the book’s margin off both ends. They differ by the change in that margin, and we never average them together.
Exchange cross-check
Kalshi ask, pre-game47¢
With Kalshi’s fee49¢
Counted in the price comparisonyes
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Raw close vs our price−1.09%
…of which: waiting paid0.00%
…of which: market drift−1.09%
Positive means we locked a better number than the market settled at. It can be negative and it is shown when it is. Beating the close and still losing is normal, and so is winning at a worse price than the close. Never read it as a return: break-even is roughly half the hold we paid, about +2.25 points.
Why two numbers. The two legs telescope to the raw figure (0.00% + −1.09% = −1.09%), because an opening quote for the other side was never captured and only raw prices can be chained. The −0.44% above is the de-vigged number, which strips the book’s margin off both ends. They differ by the change in that margin, and we never average them together.
Exchange cross-check
Kalshi ask, pre-game62¢
With Kalshi’s fee64¢
Counted in the price comparisonyes
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Raw close vs our price+2.62%
…of which: waiting paid0.00%
…of which: market drift+2.62%
Positive means we locked a better number than the market settled at. It can be negative and it is shown when it is. Beating the close and still losing is normal, and so is winning at a worse price than the close. Never read it as a return: break-even is roughly half the hold we paid, about +2.25 points.
Why two numbers. The two legs telescope to the raw figure (0.00% + +2.62% = +2.62%), because an opening quote for the other side was never captured and only raw prices can be chained. The +1.39% above is the de-vigged number, which strips the book’s margin off both ends. They differ by the change in that margin, and we never average them together.
Exchange cross-check
Kalshi ask, pre-game48¢
With Kalshi’s fee50¢
Counted in the price comparisonyes
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Raw close vs our price−0.45%
…of which: waiting paid0.00%
…of which: market drift−0.45%
Positive means we locked a better number than the market settled at. It can be negative and it is shown when it is. Beating the close and still losing is normal, and so is winning at a worse price than the close. Never read it as a return: break-even is roughly half the hold we paid, about +2.25 points.
Why two numbers. The two legs telescope to the raw figure (0.00% + −0.45% = −0.45%), because an opening quote for the other side was never captured and only raw prices can be chained. The −1.44% above is the de-vigged number, which strips the book’s margin off both ends. They differ by the change in that margin, and we never average them together.
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Raw close vs our price−3.86%
…of which: waiting paid0.00%
…of which: market drift−3.86%
Positive means we locked a better number than the market settled at. It can be negative and it is shown when it is. Beating the close and still losing is normal, and so is winning at a worse price than the close. Never read it as a return: break-even is roughly half the hold we paid, about +2.25 points.
Why two numbers. The two legs telescope to the raw figure (0.00% + −3.86% = −3.86%), because an opening quote for the other side was never captured and only raw prices can be chained. The −3.40% above is the de-vigged number, which strips the book’s margin off both ends. They differ by the change in that margin, and we never average them together.
Exchange cross-check
Kalshi ask, pre-game62¢
With Kalshi’s fee64¢
Counted in the price comparisonyes
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Raw close vs our price+3.10%
…of which: waiting paid0.00%
…of which: market drift+3.10%
Positive means we locked a better number than the market settled at. It can be negative and it is shown when it is. Beating the close and still losing is normal, and so is winning at a worse price than the close. Never read it as a return: break-even is roughly half the hold we paid, about +2.25 points.
Why two numbers. The two legs telescope to the raw figure (0.00% + +3.10% = +3.10%), because an opening quote for the other side was never captured and only raw prices can be chained. The +2.25% above is the de-vigged number, which strips the book’s margin off both ends. They differ by the change in that margin, and we never average them together.
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Raw close vs our price+4.55%
…of which: waiting paid0.00%
…of which: market drift+4.55%
Positive means we locked a better number than the market settled at. It can be negative and it is shown when it is. Beating the close and still losing is normal, and so is winning at a worse price than the close. Never read it as a return: break-even is roughly half the hold we paid, about +2.25 points.
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Raw close vs our price−1.01%
…of which: waiting paid0.00%
…of which: market drift−1.01%
Positive means we locked a better number than the market settled at. It can be negative and it is shown when it is. Beating the close and still losing is normal, and so is winning at a worse price than the close. Never read it as a return: break-even is roughly half the hold we paid, about +2.25 points.
Why two numbers. The two legs telescope to the raw figure (0.00% + −1.01% = −1.01%), because an opening quote for the other side was never captured and only raw prices can be chained. The −2.35% above is the de-vigged number, which strips the book’s margin off both ends. They differ by the change in that margin, and we never average them together.
Exchange cross-check
Kalshi ask, pre-game58¢
With Kalshi’s fee60¢
Counted in the price comparisonyes
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Raw close vs our price−1.36%
…of which: waiting paid0.00%
…of which: market drift−1.36%
Positive means we locked a better number than the market settled at. It can be negative and it is shown when it is. Beating the close and still losing is normal, and so is winning at a worse price than the close. Never read it as a return: break-even is roughly half the hold we paid, about +2.25 points.
Why two numbers. The two legs telescope to the raw figure (0.00% + −1.36% = −1.36%), because an opening quote for the other side was never captured and only raw prices can be chained. The −1.56% above is the de-vigged number, which strips the book’s margin off both ends. They differ by the change in that margin, and we never average them together.
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Raw close vs our price−1.16%
…of which: waiting paid0.00%
…of which: market drift−1.16%
Positive means we locked a better number than the market settled at. It can be negative and it is shown when it is. Beating the close and still losing is normal, and so is winning at a worse price than the close. Never read it as a return: break-even is roughly half the hold we paid, about +2.25 points.
Why two numbers. The two legs telescope to the raw figure (0.00% + −1.16% = −1.16%), because an opening quote for the other side was never captured and only raw prices can be chained. The −1.33% above is the de-vigged number, which strips the book’s margin off both ends. They differ by the change in that margin, and we never average them together.
Exchange cross-check
Kalshi ask, pre-game57¢
With Kalshi’s fee59¢
Counted in the price comparisonyes
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Raw close vs our price−0.35%
…of which: waiting paid0.00%
…of which: market drift−0.35%
Positive means we locked a better number than the market settled at. It can be negative and it is shown when it is. Beating the close and still losing is normal, and so is winning at a worse price than the close. Never read it as a return: break-even is roughly half the hold we paid, about +2.25 points.
Why two numbers. The two legs telescope to the raw figure (0.00% + −0.35% = −0.35%), because an opening quote for the other side was never captured and only raw prices can be chained. The −0.92% above is the de-vigged number, which strips the book’s margin off both ends. They differ by the change in that margin, and we never average them together.
Exchange cross-check
Kalshi ask, pre-game60¢
With Kalshi’s fee62¢
Counted in the price comparisonyes
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Raw close vs our price0.00%
…of which: waiting paid0.00%
…of which: market drift0.00%
Positive means we locked a better number than the market settled at. It can be negative and it is shown when it is. Beating the close and still losing is normal, and so is winning at a worse price than the close. Never read it as a return: break-even is roughly half the hold we paid, about +2.25 points.
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Raw close vs our price−0.18%
…of which: waiting paid0.00%
…of which: market drift−0.18%
Positive means we locked a better number than the market settled at. It can be negative and it is shown when it is. Beating the close and still losing is normal, and so is winning at a worse price than the close. Never read it as a return: break-even is roughly half the hold we paid, about +2.25 points.
Why two numbers. The two legs telescope to the raw figure (0.00% + −0.18% = −0.18%), because an opening quote for the other side was never captured and only raw prices can be chained. The +0.27% above is the de-vigged number, which strips the book’s margin off both ends. They differ by the change in that margin, and we never average them together.
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Raw close vs our price−6.64%
…of which: waiting paid+2.88%
…of which: market drift−9.51%
Positive means we locked a better number than the market settled at. It can be negative and it is shown when it is. Beating the close and still losing is normal, and so is winning at a worse price than the close. Never read it as a return: break-even is roughly half the hold we paid, about +2.25 points.
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Raw close vs our price+0.98%
…of which: waiting paid0.00%
…of which: market drift+0.98%
Positive means we locked a better number than the market settled at. It can be negative and it is shown when it is. Beating the close and still losing is normal, and so is winning at a worse price than the close. Never read it as a return: break-even is roughly half the hold we paid, about +2.25 points.
Why two numbers. The two legs telescope to the raw figure (0.00% + +0.98% = +0.98%), because an opening quote for the other side was never captured and only raw prices can be chained. The +0.70% above is the de-vigged number, which strips the book’s margin off both ends. They differ by the change in that margin, and we never average them together.
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
Raw close vs our price+2.01%
…of which: waiting paid0.00%
…of which: market drift+2.01%
Positive means we locked a better number than the market settled at. It can be negative and it is shown when it is. Beating the close and still losing is normal, and so is winning at a worse price than the close. Never read it as a return: break-even is roughly half the hold we paid, about +2.25 points.
Why two numbers. The two legs telescope to the raw figure (0.00% + +2.01% = +2.01%), because an opening quote for the other side was never captured and only raw prices can be chained. The +2.42% above is the de-vigged number, which strips the book’s margin off both ends. They differ by the change in that margin, and we never average them together.
Exchange cross-check
Kalshi ask, pre-game46¢
With Kalshi’s fee48¢
Counted in the price comparisonyes
Every value on this card is read off one row of the WNBA board. Where a field is not in the payload the card says so rather than filling it in. This row is in the CSV, unchanged.
