[DATA THAT THINKS]

How Consensus Edge works

Every pick on the slate is a weighted blend of three sources (Square, Sharp, Crowd) and an AI confidence check, followed by a closing-line-value audit. Here is the full math, in plain language, with a worked example.

Three sources and a confidence check

We don't believe any single source is reliable alone. We blend three of them, with weights that adapt when one is missing or noisy, then check how far to trust the result.

Square
The books' price
The consensus of 15+ sportsbooks with each book's margin removed, leaning on the lowest-margin books. The market's own number — not "square money", which means casual bettors.
Sharp
Our model
Our own ratings for each sport (the NFL's starts from the market spread), adjusted for injuries, rest, weather and key numbers. Our model — not "sharp money", which means professional bettors.
Crowd
Prediction markets
Polymarket and Kalshi prices: money backing an opinion. On moneylines, weighted by how much money stands behind the price.
AI
Confidence check
Reads how strongly the sources agree and how fresh the data is, then can strengthen an edge or cut it by up to half.

A worked example, end-to-end

Illustrative numbers for a typical NFL Sunday matchup. The books post Kansas City Chiefs −3.5 against the Los Angeles Rams. We pull every book we track, plus Polymarket and Kalshi.

1
De-vig the market. The books' consensus prices Chiefs −3.5 at −120 and Rams +3.5 at +100: 104.5% in total, a 4.3% hold for the books. Strip it out.
Square: 52.3% Chiefs cover
2
Run the Sharp model. Our NFL rating starts from the market's own spread, then adjusts for rest, injuries, travel and key numbers.
Sharp: 56.0% Chiefs cover
3
Read the prediction markets. Polymarket and Kalshi both price the Chiefs above the books, mapped to the same spread.
Crowd: 55.5% Polymarket · 55.0% Kalshi (Chiefs cover)
4
Blend with dynamic weights. The books and the prediction markets are weighted by which of them have a price. The Sharp model then moves that market number a twentieth of the way toward its own, the weight its graded record supports.
Consensus: 54.4% Chiefs cover
5
Compute the EV at the best price. The best Chiefs −3.5 on the board is −105, which breaks even at 51.2%. At 54.4% that price returns:
+6.3% EV at −105
6
Apply the confidence check and the market's rules. The sources agree, so the confidence check leaves the edge alone. But NFL spreads are one of the most efficient markets in sports: we need +10% EV to grade one, and we treat anything above +10% as too good to be true. A +6.3% read is an opinion, not a bet.
Grade: NO EDGE · no bet at this price
7
Capture for CLV audit. We keep re-pricing until kickoff and capture the closing line on the last pass before the start. CLV compares the price you could take with that no-vig close; positive CLV means the market moved your way. We publish it for every graded pick.
CLV captured · audit-ready

When we switch a market off

The pipeline above decides whether a price is worth taking. A second, blunter rule decides whether we will quote that market at all.

We audit every market against its own closing lines. When one shows we are persistently miscalibrated there — not unlucky, miscalibrated — we suppress it outright, and no edge in that market gets a recommendation regardless of how large it looks. MLB moneylines, run lines and over/unders are all switched off today on exactly that evidence: the over/under audit measured our picks 14.9 points worse than predicted, at −13.3% ROI, so the market was killed rather than tuned.

Two consequences worth setting expectations on. Some days the board recommends nothing at all, and that is the rule working rather than the site being broken. And a suppressed market says so on the card — it will not tell you a bet narrowly missed a threshold, because a switched-off market was never weighed against one.

Raising a floor was considered and rejected: at a higher bar the same cohort still ran 12.3 points worse than predicted, so a stricter threshold would have shrunk the sample without touching the miscalibration. Every suppression is one line of config and is reversed the moment the audit supports it.

Why this is different

Action Network / VSiN
Editorial-driven picks
No transparent math
No CLV audit per pick
Public/social signals
OddsJam / Unabated
Line shopping
EV calculation
No independent model
No prediction-market input
Consensus Edge
Square + Sharp + Crowd blend, with an AI confidence check
Every pick math fully exposed
Per-pick CLV audit + calibration
Steam alerts on watched games

Trust the math, not the marketing

Every claim on this site is auditable. We publish:

/trust/clv · Aggregate closing-line-value across every pick we've made. If we're not beating the close, the model isn't real.
/trust/calibration · Predicted vs actual win rate by 5pp bucket, per sport, per bet type. Sharp users want to verify the model is calibrated where it claims to be. We show you.
/trust/steam · Feed of sharp-operator line moves. When two sharp operators (in practice Pinnacle and BetOnline) move the same moneyline or spread by ≥2pp inside 5 minutes, it's usually real money. On a spread a move counts for what its points are worth, not how many there are: against one league-wide margin distribution, the same for every game, the margin table measures a half-point at about 4.8pp onto the key number 3 and about 0.5pp from 8.5 to 9. A half-point onto 3, 6 or 7 clears the 2pp bar on its own; onto 4, 10 or 14 does not; most half-points away from the key numbers are not. We surface it: the public view lists moves that settled more than two hours ago, and Pro shows them live.
/methodology · Full technical reference. Every signal in the pipeline, with the math and the empirical basis. For the sharp who wants to verify every line of reasoning.
Try it on tonight's slate
Sign in to save games to your watchlist and receive steam alerts.
Sign in