Closing line value (CLV) measures whether you got a better price than the market's final, sharpest line — Pinnacle's closing odds with the bookmaker margin removed.
Consistently positive CLV is the one metric professionals trust: it proves edge long before short-term win/loss variance means anything — and it is why sharp books limit winning players.
These numbers cover moneyline-type markets only (1X2, match winner, moneyline) — the one family where CLV is a reliable profit proxy. Why we refuse to show a single blended CLV number across all markets is explained right below.
| Sport | Bets | Avg CLV | % beat close | ROI |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseball | 657 | +1.50% | 57% | +114.6% |
| Tennis | 540 | +1.70% |
| 54% |
| +12.1% |
| Football | 208 | +4.80% | 64% | -25.3% |
| Hockey | 41 | +6.30% | 61% | -17.1% |
| Basketball | 23 | +0.80% | 50% | -2.5% |
Sport rows blend market families (moneyline + totals + handicaps). For moneyline-heavy sports the CLV column is meaningful; elsewhere the ROI column matters more.
Most tipsters show no CLV at all. Those who do usually show one blended number — and that is exactly what would mislead you. Our own methodology audit (across every settled bet) found that CLV is a reliable profit proxy only for moneyline-type markets. There, everything lined up for us: positive CLV, positive returns, and CLV correlating with model edge the way it should.
On totals (over/under) the bookmaker moves the line instead of the price — measured CLV is compressed and, in our audit, actually correlated negatively with model edge. On handicaps CLV is actively misleading: our handicap bets carried +3.7pp CLV — the best of any family — and still lost money (−13.3% yield). A blended headline number would have hidden that bleed behind good moneyline CLV.
So we lead every market family with the metric that actually predicts profit there — and we show the numbers even when they are uncomfortable:
| Market family | Lead metric | Bets | Avg CLV | P&L (u) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moneyline (1X2 / match winner / ML) | CLV-led | 472 | +1.97% | +81.9u |
| Stat-line props (points, yards …) | ROI + calibration — CLV compressed | 10 | +0.22%† | -1.9u |
| Other | ROI | 903 | +1.08%† | +1.9u |
† CLV not reliable here.
Closing line value is the difference between the odds you took and the final (closing) odds at the sharpest bookmaker just before the event starts, after removing the bookmaker's margin. If you bet a team at 2.10 and the fair closing price is 2.00, you have positive CLV — you got a better price than the most informed market of all.
The closing line at a sharp book like Pinnacle is the most efficient price in the market: it aggregates all information and all sharp money. Consistently beating it means you are systematically buying probability for less than it is worth, which converges to profit over hundreds of bets — long before short-term win/loss variance settles. It is also why sharp books limit players with persistent positive CLV.
On totals and handicaps. There the bookmaker re-centres the LINE (the number of goals or the spread) rather than the price, and odds cluster around 2.0 — so measured CLV is compressed and can be positive while the bets lose. Our own audit found handicaps at +3.7pp average CLV yet a negative realised yield. For those market families we judge performance on realised ROI and calibration instead, and say so openly.
At settlement we compare the odds our model recommended against Pinnacle's closing line for the same selection, with the vig (bookmaker margin) removed — the devigged fair price. The measurement is model-independent: it never uses our own probability, only the market's final judgement. Every settled bet is included; nothing is cherry-picked.