Don't Care if You Know Football or Not, Buying the Draw Is the Best Strategy for This World Cup?

Odaily星球日报Publicado a 2026-06-22Actualizado a 2026-06-22

Resumen

The article analyzes the 2026 FIFA World Cup group stage and argues that betting on a draw has been a surprisingly profitable strategy. Based on data from the prediction market Polymarket, a strategy of betting $1000 on a draw for each of the first 40 matches would have yielded a return of over 100%, despite only 13 matches ending in a draw. The core of the strategy is not the frequency of wins, but the high payout when low-probability draws occur, such as Spain's 0-0 draw with Cape Verde, where pre-match odds for a draw were only 5.5%. The article identifies common draw scores, like 1-1, which provide stability, and high-value 0-0 stalemates, where favorites fail to break down resilient defenses. It highlights Group G as an example, where 3 of the first 4 matches ended in draws, illustrating that draws are a tactical part of group stage calculus as teams often prioritize not losing. In conclusion, while strong teams remain favorites on the pitch, the article claims that for traders, betting on draws has so far produced the most significant profits.

Original | Odaily Planet Daily (@OdailyChina)

Author | Asher(@Asher_ 0210)

As the World Cup group stage progresses, a very counter-intuitive phenomenon is becoming increasingly clear—buying the favorite, doesn't necessarily make money; buying the underdog, isn't necessarily easy to hold onto either, but if you blindly buy the draw for every match, you might actually be raking it in.

Calculated based on Polymarket pre-match prediction data, if you put $1000 on "Draw" for every match, there have been 11 draws in the previous 36 matches (as shown below). That is to say, with a total investment of $36,000, the winnings from successful bets amount to $73,214. After deducting the principal, the net profit is $37,214, representing a return of over 100%.

Even more impressive, according to Polymarket pre-match prediction data, if we continue the strategy of "$1000 on Draw per match" for today's 4 matches (total investment of $4000). Looking at the results: Spain 4-0 Saudi Arabia, New Zealand 1-3 Egypt—these two resulted in a loss of the stake; but Belgium 0-0 Iran and Uruguay 2-2 Cape Verde were hits, with a combined payout of approximately $8,700. This means that even with only 2 hits out of the 4 matches today, the daily net profit is still around $4,700.

Including today's 4 matches, out of 40 World Cup group stage matches, there have been 13 draws. With a total investment of $40,000, the total payout from winning bets is approximately $81,914. After deducting all investments, the net profit is about $41,914, representing a return of nearly 105%.

A hit rate of 13/40 isn't particularly high, but the key to the draw strategy is never about "hitting often," but about "hitting big." The lower the pre-match probability of a draw, the higher the payout multiplier when it hits. Matches like Spain vs. Cape Verde with a 5.5% draw probability, Ecuador vs. Curaçao with an 8% draw probability, or Qatar vs. Switzerland with a 13% draw probability—hitting just a few of these is enough to turn the entire strategy from a small loss into a massive gain.

Cape Verde's Draw Against Spain Is the Most Typical "Liquidation Game" of the World Cup So Far

The Spain vs. Cape Verde group stage match wasn't just a big win for the draw strategy; it was also a nightmare for pre-match buyers backing the favorite.

In this group stage match, Spain's pre-match win probability was as high as 92%. Polymarket data shows that account @betoor619 (address: 0x70088c990ffae782c699b9250f5aa6cbe4e3c666) bought Spain to win in the World Cup group stage match Spain vs. Cape Verde. The match ended 0:0, resulting in a loss of $999,000 for this user.

It's worth noting that this user bought in at the 92-cent moment, meaning they staked $1 million in principal for a potential profit of $85,000. A seemingly sure-win trade ultimately resulted in a cold loss due to the 7 incredible saves by Cape Verde's 40-year-old goalkeeper and Cape Verde's extremely resilient defense.

0-0 and 1-1 Are Becoming the Main Theme of This World Cup So Far

Looking at the draw results that have hit so far, draws in this World Cup group stage aren't appearing randomly but are concentrated in a few typical scorelines.

The most common is 1-1. Canada vs. Bosnia and Herzegovina, Qatar vs. Switzerland, Brazil vs. Morocco, Belgium vs. Egypt, Saudi Arabia vs. Uruguay, Portugal vs. DR Congo, Czech Republic vs. South Africa—all ended with this score. The commonality in these matches is that neither side was completely without chances, nor did the weaker team simply park the bus until the end. More often, the stronger team failed to convert their advantage into a win, while the weaker team seized an opportunity to respond. The matches seemed back-and-forth, but in the end, neither side could truly break through the other.

For traders, the value of 1-1 lies in its stability. It's not the most exaggerated source of profit, but it occurs frequently, forming the foundation of this "buy draw every match" strategy.

What really boosts the profits are the 0-0 draws.

Spain vs. Cape Verde is the most typical example. Spain was considered the absolute favorite pre-match, with only a 5.5% draw probability. But the match ended 0-0. If $1,000 was invested pre-match on the draw, the payout would be approximately $18,182. Ecuador vs. Curaçao follows a similar logic. With only an 8% draw probability, it also resulted in 0-0, with $1,000 invested corresponding to a payout of $12,500.

Therefore, the real money-making aspect of the draw strategy isn't about hitting every match, but rather that a few low-probability draws, when they do hit, come with very exaggerated payout multipliers. This is especially true for 0-0 matches, where the on-field action often involves the favorite team attacking constantly while the underdog's goalkeeper and defense repeatedly clear the ball.

Group G Is Even More Ridiculous: 3 Draws in 4 Matches

If Spain vs. Cape Verde represents low-probability draws, then Group G is more like a microcosm of the "draw density" in this group stage.

Out of the first 4 matches, Group G has produced 3 draws. In the first round: Belgium 1-1 Egypt, Iran 2-2 New Zealand; in the second round: Belgium 0-0 Iran. The only match with a decisive result was New Zealand vs. Egypt, but this doesn't change one fact: the overall rhythm of this group has been completely slowed down by draws.

Especially Belgium, who have drawn both of their group stage matches so far. For the team, this means the pressure to qualify from the group continues; but for those who bought a Belgium win pre-match, the outcome of both matches was the same—no loss, but their position wiped out.

This is also where the draw is most underestimated in prediction markets. The market prefers to buy the favorite to win because it seems more intuitive; but the real logic of group stage football isn't "the favorite must win," but rather that many teams are willing to settle for 1 point. The weaker team doesn't want to lose, the stronger team doesn't want to take risks too early. Once a match reaches a stalemate, a draw becomes a very realistic outcome.

3 draws in the first 4 matches of Group G indicates that draws are not accidental upsets, but part of the group stage tactical game. Especially when the points haven't been significantly separated, every team starts calculating—winning is of course best, but avoiding losing first is often the safer choice.

Summary

In this World Cup, the strong teams are still the main characters.

Spain will win, Brazil will win, and favorites will always have matches where they deliver a crushing victory. But if we look purely at trading profits, the most profitable script in the group stage so far might not be the big wins by the giants, but rather those recurring 1-1s, 0-0s, and 2-2s.

Those who bought the favorites are waiting for goals, those who bought the draw are waiting for the final whistle, and so far, the latter are laughing louder.

Preguntas relacionadas

QAccording to the article, what has been the most profitable betting strategy for the World Cup group stage so far?

AAccording to the article, the most profitable betting strategy so far has been to consistently bet on a draw in every match. Using a hypothetical strategy of betting $1000 on a draw for each of the first 40 group stage matches, the strategy yielded a net profit of approximately $41,914, representing a return of nearly 105%.

QWhy is the 'bet on draw' strategy considered effective despite a relatively low win rate?

AThe 'bet on draw' strategy is effective not because it wins frequently, but because it 'wins valuably'. The pre-match probability for a draw is often very low, which means the payout multiplier is very high when a draw does occur. Hitting just a few of these low-probability draws can turn the overall strategy from a slight loss into a significant profit.

QWhich specific match is highlighted as the most typical 'liquidation game' for favorite bettors?

AThe match between Spain and Cape Verde is highlighted as the most typical 'liquidation game'. One user on Polymarket bet $1 million on Spain to win when the probability was 92%, aiming for an $85,000 profit. The match ended 0-0, resulting in a loss of 99.9% of their stake.

QWhat are the two most common draw scorelines mentioned, and how do they differ in their impact on the betting strategy?

AThe two most common draw scorelines are 1-1 and 0-0. The 1-1 draws are more frequent and form the 'base' of the strategy's returns. The 0-0 draws, while less frequent, are the key profit drivers because they often occur in matches where one team is a heavy favorite, leading to very low pre-match draw probabilities and therefore extremely high payout multipliers when they hit.

QWhat does the high frequency of draws in Group G (3 draws in 4 matches) illustrate about the nature of group stage matches?

AThe high frequency of draws in Group G illustrates that draws are not merely accidental upsets, but are an integral part of group stage tactics. In the early stages, many teams prioritize not losing over aggressively seeking a win. The calculus for teams often involves securing at least 1 point to maintain their position, leading to more cautious play and a higher likelihood of drawn matches.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Soaring Export Data for Memory Chips, Market Is Redefining the Valuation Anchor for Memory Stocks

Korean storage export data for the first 20 days of June shows substantial year-on-year increases in both value and price-per-kilogram for categories like DRAM, NAND, and SSDs. This signals a potential shift beyond simple demand recovery, indicating rising prices and a product mix shift towards higher-value items, possibly influenced by AI infrastructure needs. A key point is that the surge in price-per-kilogram is not simply a uniform chip price hike. It reflects a combination of actual price increases and, more importantly, an export structure increasingly dominated by high-value-density products like HBM (High-Bandwidth Memory) and advanced DRAM, which are critical for AI servers. This suggests AI-driven demand may be spilling over from just HBM into broader memory markets. SK Hynix stands to benefit directly due to its leading HBM position. For Samsung and Micron, the implication is potential for greater margin elasticity if the tightness in high-end memory spreads to enterprise SSD and NAND prices. However, the storage sector remains cyclical. Risks include supply expansion, inventory changes, and potential slowdowns in broader AI capital expenditure. Ultimately, while the strong export data supports upward revisions for storage company earnings and fuels discussion of an "AI infrastructure bottleneck premium," a definitive valuation shift from a cyclical to a structural story depends on upcoming quarterly reports. Investors need confirmation from SK Hynix, Samsung, and Micron that improvements in average selling prices, product mix, and, crucially,毛利率 are sustained over multiple quarters.

marsbitHace 43 min(s)

Soaring Export Data for Memory Chips, Market Is Redefining the Valuation Anchor for Memory Stocks

marsbitHace 43 min(s)

Why Does SpaceX Have Such a High Valuation Ceiling? The Answer Lies in Musk's Business Blueprint

SpaceX achieved a record-breaking IPO on June 12, 2026, with its market cap surging past $2.1 trillion. This valuation reflects its central role within Elon Musk's expansive, interconnected technological ecosystem. The article details how four core components form a synergistic closed-loop system: 1) **The "Brain" (xAI & Orbital Compute):** xAI provides AI models and massive ground/space-based supercomputing for simulation and decision-making across the system. 2) **The "Neural Logistics Core" (Starlink & Starship):** Starlink's low-latency satellite network enables global data transmission, while Starship's low-cost, reusable launch capacity aims to make large-scale space deployment economically viable. 3) **The "Physical Body" (Tesla & Optimus):** Tesla's manufacturing prowess and energy products support hardware production and power, pivoting toward mass-producing the Optimus humanoid robot for terrestrial and potential space-based labor. 4) **The "Human Interface" (Neuralink & X):** Neuralink seeks direct brain-computer communication, and the X platform provides real-time societal data. Together, these elements create three reinforcing "flywheels": manufacturing/logistics, data-driven iteration, and energy/compute/network synergy. This integrated approach promises lower costs, faster innovation cycles, and potential infrastructure-as-a-service offerings. However, it also concentrates technical, regulatory, and corporate governance risks. Ultimately, SpaceX's high valuation stems from its position as the indispensable infrastructural backbone—handling space transport, global communications, and future orbital computing—tying together Musk's entire vision for a self-reinforcing technological empire.

marsbitHace 48 min(s)

Why Does SpaceX Have Such a High Valuation Ceiling? The Answer Lies in Musk's Business Blueprint

marsbitHace 48 min(s)

Snap, Unprofitable for Nine Years, and a Decade-Long AR Obsession Without Return

Snap's AR Obsession: A Decade of Betting Against the Odds On June 16, Snap CEO Evan Spiegel unveiled the new AR glasses, Specs, priced at $2,195, causing the company's stock (SNAP) to plummet nearly 10%. The launch was met with intense criticism online, with investors questioning why a consistently unprofitable company would stake its future on an expensive product its core young user base can't afford. Snapchat, known for pioneering features like ephemeral Stories and popular AR lenses (like the iconic dog filter), has a history of innovation often copied by rivals like Instagram and Meta. Despite this, it has struggled to translate first-mover advantage into commercial success. Since its 2017 IPO, Snap has reported annual net losses, with a Q1 2026 loss of $89 million. Its stock is down 94% from its 2021 peak, hampered by iOS privacy changes, competition, and a young demographic less attractive to major advertisers. In this challenging context, Spiegel is doubling down on AR. He calls 2026 a "crucible moment," having recently laid off 16% of staff while reportedly investing over $3.5 billion cumulatively in its AR glasses line over nearly a decade. The new Specs represent a significant leap from the 2016 camera-focused Spectacles, offering true AR overlays, gesture control, and standalone operation. However, at $2,195, it faces tough comparisons. While more advanced than Meta's $799 Ray-Ban smart glasses, critics point to its heavier weight, short battery life, and features largely replicable by a smartphone. Facing pressure from investors to cut losses on the Specs project, Spiegel has refused, framing it as essential to Snap's long-term vision. The company finds itself in a paradoxical position: cutting costs while heavily funding a decade-long, unproven bet. Some see Specs as an awkward but necessary step in AR's evolution, akin to early mobile phones. Whether Spiegel is a visionary outlier or a gambler destined to fail remains an open question, highlighting the tension between long-term ambition and short-term market demands.

marsbitHace 1 hora(s)

Snap, Unprofitable for Nine Years, and a Decade-Long AR Obsession Without Return

marsbitHace 1 hora(s)

Annualized Revenue Exceeds $20 Billion, Kalshi Aims to Become the First Prediction Platform IPO?

Kalshi, a leading U.S. prediction markets platform, is reportedly in early, informal discussions for an Initial Public Offering (IPO). The company's annualized revenue now exceeds $2 billion, fueled by its dominance of over 90% of the domestic prediction market activity. This growth stems from a surge in trading volume—reaching a total of $52.7 billion—and an increase in fee rates, largely driven by sports event contracts like the NBA playoffs and the 2026 FIFA World Cup. Monthly active users are approximately 2 million. Kalshi recently raised $1 billion in a funding round led by Coatue Management, valuing the company at $22 billion. It has also expanded its offerings to include Bitcoin perpetual contracts and plans to launch a dedicated trading platform, Kalshi Pro. However, Kalshi's path to an IPO faces significant regulatory hurdles. The core risk involves jurisdictional conflicts, as multiple U.S. states are challenging its operations under local gambling laws. For instance, Arizona has filed criminal charges against the platform, while states like Kentucky have filed lawsuits. Kalshi and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) argue that its event contracts fall under exclusive federal jurisdiction as "swaps." The outcomes of these ongoing legal battles could critically impact Kalshi's core revenue and its IPO timeline. Analysts suggest that while an IPO could theoretically occur by late 2026, a more likely timeframe is late 2027 or 2028, contingent on resolving legal issues and favorable market conditions. If successful, its fundraising could significantly exceed $1 billion, given its current valuation and revenue multiple.

Foresight NewsHace 1 hora(s)

Annualized Revenue Exceeds $20 Billion, Kalshi Aims to Become the First Prediction Platform IPO?

Foresight NewsHace 1 hora(s)

Financing Weekly Report | 11 Public Financing Events, Stablecoin Payment Infrastructure Company Trace Finance Completes $32 Million Series A Round Led by CoinFund

Financing Weekly Report | 11 public funding events recorded, with a total scale exceeding $264 million. The stablecoin payment infrastructure sector remains a hot spot. Key Deals: - Trace Finance, a stablecoin payment infrastructure firm, raised $32 million in a Series A round led by CoinFund to expand in Latin America and Asia-Pacific. - Galaxy Ventures co-led a $140 million Series A round for Karta, a US credit card provider for global travelers without requiring an SSN. - Instant payment platform Interchecks completed a $50 million Series C round. - Paradigm led a $9 million Series A for Latin American cross-border payment app El Dorado. - Range, a stablecoin compliance startup, raised $8.3 million in an oversubscribed Series A. - RWA infrastructure project Renaiss raised $1.5 million to expand its on-chain collectibles platform. Sector Breakdown: - Infrastructure & Tools: 6 deals, including the above-mentioned Trace Finance, Range, and Renaiss. - Centralized Finance (CeFi): 3 deals, led by Karta's $140 million round. - DeFi: 1 deal – reinsurance protocol Re secured strategic investment from Coinbase Ventures. - Prediction Markets: 1 deal – K25.ai completed a $10 million Pre-A round from NewGen. Other notable transactions include digital asset depository RDC raising $7 million, ad-tech startup EarnOS securing $6 million, and a $1 million strategic investment in LitVM, a ZK Layer 2 for Litecoin. The report highlights sustained investor interest in stablecoin payment infrastructure, compliant on-chain finance, and real-world asset (RWA) tokenization.

marsbitHace 2 hora(s)

Financing Weekly Report | 11 Public Financing Events, Stablecoin Payment Infrastructure Company Trace Finance Completes $32 Million Series A Round Led by CoinFund

marsbitHace 2 hora(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片