Which Premier League Clubs Beat the 1X2 Odds? ROI by Club
I backed every Premier League club to win in every league match over 1,900 games. A handful beat the odds. Most didn't, and the price you take matters.
Every fan has a club they swear the bookmakers underrate. I wanted to test that properly by backing each Premier League club to win in every league match from 2021/22–2025/26, at flat stakes, and seeing who actually came out ahead. This is the groundwork I want behind any 1X2 bet tips I put my name to, because a hunch about a club means little until it is tested against a price.
Across 1,900 matches, backing every club every time returned −7.2% at the major-bookmaker price and −3.2% at the best available price. Only 6 of 21 qualifying clubs showed a profit at the major price, rising to 9 at the best price. Aston Villa topped the table at +24.2%, and Burnley sat at the bottom on −51.7%.
Section AAston Villa lead and Burnley trail the Premier League ROI table
This chart ranks the top and bottom of the 21 qualifying clubs by the return on a 1-unit win bet in every league match, with the major-bookmaker price and the best price shown side by side. Villa's +24.2% leads Brentford on +11.4% and Nottingham Forest on +10.5%, with Fulham, Bournemouth and Arsenal also in profit. At the other end, Southampton lost −47.4% and Burnley −51.7%, while Chelsea, Leicester and Leeds all lost heavily too.
The best-price bars are worth a look. They lift every club, and for Manchester United and Everton they turn a small loss into a small profit.
Top 8 and bottom 8 of 21 qualifying clubs; middle 5 omitted.
View the data: premier league: roi backing each club to win
| Major-bookmaker price | Best price | |
|---|---|---|
| Aston Villa | +24.2% | +28.9% |
| Brentford | +11.4% | +18.4% |
| Nottingham Forest | +10.5% | +16.0% |
| Fulham | +7.3% | +12.0% |
| Bournemouth | +6.6% | +10.9% |
| Arsenal | +3.7% | +6.9% |
| Manchester United | −1.9% | +1.3% |
| Everton | −2.4% | +2.3% |
| Tottenham | −6.5% | −2.7% |
| Wolves | −8.1% | −3.2% |
| Liverpool | −9.8% | −7.1% |
| Chelsea | −24.6% | −22.6% |
| Leicester | −29.4% | −26.2% |
| Leeds | −30.5% | −26.2% |
| Southampton | −47.4% | −44.9% |
| Burnley | −51.7% | −49.3% |
| All Premier League clubs | −7.2% | −3.2% |
Here is the catch, and it is a big one. Club returns over a few seasons are extremely noisy. Villa's +24.2% over 190 matches carries a 95% range of ±23.7 points, and only 1 of the 21 clubs had a range sitting entirely above zero. I read this table as a record of what happened, not a system.
Section BAston Villa beat their implied odds while Southampton and Burnley fell short
ROI comes down to one thing: did a club win more often than its price implied? This chart sets the margin-free implied win rate against the actual win rate. Villa won 46.8% of 190 matches against an implied 39.0%, the widest gap in the study. Fulham won 38.2% against 31.8%, and Brentford won 35.8% against 32.6%.
The shortfalls are steeper. Southampton won 14.9% against an implied 24.6%, and Burnley won 14% against 21.9%. Chelsea are the case that stands out to me. Priced to win 51.5% of the time, they won 44.2%.
View the data: priced to win vs actually won
| Priced | Won | 95% range | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aston Villa (190 matches) | 39.0% | 46.8% | ±7.1 |
| Fulham (152 matches) | 31.8% | 38.2% | ±7.7 |
| Arsenal (190 matches) | 58.0% | 64.2% | ±6.8 |
| Brentford (190 matches) | 32.6% | 35.8% | ±6.8 |
| Newcastle (190 matches) | 41.5% | 44.2% | ±7.1 |
| Leicester (114 matches) | 28.4% | 25.4% | ±8 |
| Leeds (114 matches) | 30.3% | 23.7% | ±7.8 |
| Chelsea (190 matches) | 51.5% | 44.2% | ±7.1 |
| Burnley (114 matches) | 21.9% | 14.0% | ±6.4 |
| Southampton (114 matches) | 24.6% | 14.9% | ±6.5 |
Arsenal show that favourites can beat the market as well. They were priced at 58% and won 64.2%, which is enough to keep a short-priced side in profit.
Section CSeason by season, Villa kept climbing while Brentford swung and Chelsea sank
Five-season totals can hide a lot, so this chart tracks three ever-present clubs year by year. Villa went from −1.8% in 2021/22 to +30.0%, +36.2%, +8.4% and then +48.1% in 2025/26. That is a market slow to catch up with a rising side.
Brentford's line looks very different: +23.5%, then +64.0%, then a fall to −32.3%, followed by +2.9% and −1.3%. Chelsea lost in every season, with their worst at −51.3% in 2022/23.
View the data: season-by-season roi for three ever-present clubs
| Aston Villa | Brentford | Chelsea | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021/22 | −1.8% | 23.5% | −17.2% |
| 2022/23 | 30.0% | 64.0% | −51.3% |
| 2023/24 | 36.2% | −32.3% | −12.8% |
| 2024/25 | 8.4% | 2.9% | −11.0% |
| 2025/26 | 48.1% | −1.3% | −30.5% |
My takeaway is that one hot season usually gets priced in. Brentford's profit faded once the market adjusted. Chelsea's case points the other way: a big name can stay overpriced for years.
Section DHome and away splits for Villa, Brentford, Fulham and the strugglers
The table splits returns by venue for the top and bottom four clubs. Villa made money both ways, with +19.7% at home and +28.6% away. Brentford's profit came almost entirely on the road, at +0.4% at home against +22.3% away, while Fulham were the reverse, with +16.1% at home and −1.5% away.
Among the strugglers, Leicester lost −14.6% at home but −44.2% away, and Southampton were worse at home (−56.7%) than away (−38.1%). Burnley lost heavily at both venues.
| Club | Home n | Home ROI | Away n | Away ROI |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aston Villa | 95 | +19.7% | 95 | +28.6% |
| Brentford | 95 | +0.4% | 95 | +22.3% |
| Nottingham Forest | 76 | +7.6% | 76 | +13.4% |
| Fulham | 76 | +16.1% | 76 | −1.5% |
| Leicester | 57 | −14.6% | 57 | −44.2% |
| Leeds | 57 | −24.7% | 57 | −36.2% |
| Southampton | 57 | −56.7% | 57 | −38.1% |
| Burnley | 57 | −54.4% | 57 | −49.0% |
Each half is only 57 to 95 matches, so I treat these splits as clues worth checking rather than rules.
Club verdict
What this file means before you bet.
- Respect Villa's record. Aston Villa won 46.8% against an implied 39.0% and returned +24.2%, so the market has underrated them for a long stretch. Keep checking whether the price has caught up before assuming the edge is still there.
- Always take the best price. Backing every club returned −7.2% at the major-bookmaker price but −3.2% at the best price, and clubs in profit rose from 6 to 9. The price you take matters as much as the club you pick.
- Don't back names blindly. Chelsea lost money in every season and Burnley and Southampton lost close to half their stakes. Club samples here are small, as few as 114 matches, so treat these as warnings rather than certainties.
Frequently asked
Which Premier League club was the most profitable to back to win?
Aston Villa, who returned +24.2% at the major-bookmaker price and +28.9% at the best price over 190 matches. They won 46.8% of those games against an implied 39.0%.
Does backing every Premier League team to win make a profit?
No. Backing every club in every match returned −7.2% at the major-bookmaker price and −3.2% at the best available price.
Has backing Chelsea to win lost money?
Yes. Chelsea returned −24.6% at the major-bookmaker price, winning 44.2% of matches when priced at 51.5%, and they lost money in every season, including −51.3% in 2022/23.
I'm Harper Greaves, and I specialise in 1X2 Match Result betting, turning years of watching football and arguing about outcomes into research-backed picks worth your time.
View profile →