Analyst Rankings

Ranked by the FightCardIQ Score: how often an analyst called the winner, plus credit for the method and round calls that landed. How the Score works.

No analyst on this board is separated from any other. Every range below overlaps every other range, including the top and bottom of the table. The order is the best estimate we have; it is not evidence that anyone here is better than anyone else.

1 TheWeasle 88.5% 34 of 48Consistent with a range of 71 to 100 percent or above, shown capped at 100 percent. 34 right · +5.75 method · +2.75 round
2 AJ 82.7% 52 of 71Consistent with a range of 70 to 93 percent. 52 right · +6.25 method · +0.50 round
3 KennyOkoyeMMA 81.3% 22 of 28Consistent with a range of 63 to 93 percent. 22 right · +0.75 method
4 DFS By The Numbers 80.4% 60 of 88Consistent with a range of 68 to 91 percent. 60 right · +8.00 method · +2.75 round
5 The MMA Guru 78.8% 44 of 65Consistent with a range of 65 to 91 percent. 44 right · +5.25 method · +2.00 round
6 JakeGerberMMA 77.8% 44 of 62Consistent with a range of 64 to 89 percent. 44 right · +3.25 method · +1.00 round
7 Bedtime MMA 77.5% 67 of 99Consistent with a range of 66 to 87 percent. 67 right · +8.50 method · +1.25 round
8 James Lynch 77.1% 17 of 24Consistent with a range of 55 to 93 percent. 17 right · +1.25 method · +0.25 round
9 Lucas Tracy 75.8% 21 of 32Consistent with a range of 56 to 92 percent. 21 right · +2.50 method · +0.75 round
10 HopperoMMA 75.4% 41 of 65Consistent with a range of 61 to 88 percent. 41 right · +5.00 method · +3.00 round
11 MMA JOEY 74.1% 18 of 27Consistent with a range of 53 to 90 percent. 18 right · +1.50 method · +0.50 round
12 Half The Battle 72.4% 33 of 48Consistent with a range of 58 to 84 percent. 33 right · +1.75 method
13 Mike Finch 70.8% 23 of 36Consistent with a range of 53 to 86 percent. 23 right · +2.25 method · +0.25 round
14 Michael Chiesa 69.6% 29 of 42Consistent with a range of 54 to 82 percent. 29 right · +0.25 method
15 MMAPREDICTIONGURU 69.0% 15 of 25Consistent with a range of 47 to 88 percent. 15 right · +2.00 method · +0.25 round
16 We Want Picks 63.2% 55 of 87Consistent with a range of 53 to 73 percent. 55 right
17 Michael Bisping 61.3% 12 of 20Consistent with a range of 39 to 80 percent. 12 right · +0.25 method
18 Bookie Beatdown 59.4% 14 of 24Consistent with a range of 40 to 77 percent. 14 right · +0.25 method

Listed, not ranked

These analysts have a published record but not yet enough resolved calls to hold a position. No Score is shown for them, because at these sample sizes the 100% cap starts doing the work — three of the records below would print a Score above the analyst ranked first, one of them a flat 100.0% off 13 correct calls in 16. That is an artefact of the cap, not a verdict, and it is the reason the floor is 20 in the first place. The record is the part that means something, so the record is what is shown. Ordered by how close each is to qualifying.

Adam Martin 14 of 17 17 resolved calls — 20 needed for a position
Ben Duffy 13 of 16 16 resolved calls — 20 needed for a position
Marcel Dorff 13 of 16 16 resolved calls — 20 needed for a position
Demetrious Johnson 9 of 15 15 resolved calls — 20 needed for a position
Keith Shillan 11 of 15 15 resolved calls — 20 needed for a position
The W.A.D.E. Concept 5 of 7 7 resolved calls — 20 needed for a position
Travis Herrick MMA 5 of 6 6 resolved calls — 20 needed for a position
Rashad Evans 4 of 5 5 resolved calls — 20 needed for a position

Reading the range. Every Score here is consistent with a range, not just the single number. The range is an approximation: a 95% Wilson interval on the analyst’s hit rate, scaled by the credit they earn per correct call — so you can reproduce it from the two numbers on their own row. A wider range means a smaller sample, not a worse analyst. Where the top of a range would exceed 100% it is shown at 100%, so a bar touching the right edge is a range that runs off the end of the scale rather than one that stops there. The range is drawn as a bar on wider screens and stated in full to screen readers; on a narrow screen that column is dropped and the record stays, because the record is what the range is computed from. The axis starts at 30% because no record on this board falls below it.

What this Score is not. It measures accuracy and how specific an analyst is willing to be — not whether they beat the market. In the UFC the betting favourite wins roughly two thirds of fights, so an analyst who simply picks favourites will score well. An analyst who beat the market can score below one who merely matched it. We do not currently publish a measure of edge, and this number should not be read as one.

Underdog calls earn no credit yet. The Score reserves credit for correctly backing a market underdog, scaled by how unlikely the market thought it was. It stays switched off until every call it touches carries a frozen pre-fight price, so no analyst is currently helped or hurt by it.

Only resolved calls count. Draws, no-contests and cancelled bouts fall outside every figure here, and a record below 5 resolved calls shows no ratio at all. See every analyst's full scorecard.