Bundesliga Best Bets: Which Goal Lines Have Been Most Consistent?
Twenty-one Bundesliga seasons show which goal lines land most often, how long their bad runs last, and whether over or under 2.5 ever beat the price.
Compiled by Nurul AdiraValue & Sure Bet specialistReviewed by Marisol Quintana, Editor-in-Chief6 min read
- of matches went over 1.5 goals80.6%
- of matches stayed under 3.5 goals64.7%
- flat-stake return backing every under 2.5โ8.2%
- longest over 1.5 losing run, in matches6
When friends ask me for the steadiest goal line in German football, they usually expect me to say over 2.5. The Bundesliga has a reputation for open games, and the numbers support that reputation. The more useful question is which line lands most consistently, and whether anything held up against the price. I went through 6,426 league matches from 2005/06 to 2025/26 to find out, and the results shape what appears on my best bet selections page.
The headline answer is over 1.5 goals. It landed in 80.6% of matches, the second-highest rate of the 20 divisions in this series. Under 3.5 landed 64.7%, the second-lowest of those 20, which tells you how attacking this league is. The more popular 2.5 line was a different matter. Backing every over returned โ4.5% and every under โ8.2% at the main price.
ยง 1Over 1.5 is the steadiest line short of over 0.5
This chart ranks every full-time goal line by how often it landed. Over 0.5 sits at 93.8% and under 4.5 at 82.0%, but those prices tend to be too short to interest most bettors. The two highlighted bars are the practical ones. Over 1.5 at 80.6% gives fair odds of 1.24, and under 3.5 at 64.7% gives fair odds of 1.54.
View the data: bundesliga goal lines: how often each lands
| Share of matches, full-time goals | |
|---|---|
| Over 0.5 | 93.8% |
| Over 1.5 | 80.6% |
| Over 2.5 | 57.2% |
| Under 2.5 | 42.8% |
| Under 3.5 | 64.7% |
| Under 4.5 | 82.0% |
For me, the gap between over 2.5 at 57.2% and under 2.5 at 42.8% is the clearest sign of this league's character. Goals come often enough that the low side of the middle line is the minority outcome. Any under bet here needs a specific reason.
ยง 2Short losing runs belong to over 1.5 and under 3.5
Hit rate is only part of consistency. What matters to a bettor's nerves is how long the bad patches last. Over 1.5 never lost more than 6 in a row across the whole period, and under 3.5 never more than 7. Over 2.5 had a run of 10 losers, and under 2.5 had a run of 14.
The table also shows each line's worst and best season. Over 1.5 never fell below 74.8% (2014/15). Under 2.5 dropped as low as 35.0% in 2019/20, a season that would have tested anyone backing low-scoring games.
| Line | Hit rate | Fair odds | Longest losing run | Worst season | Best season |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Over 1.5 goals | 80.6% | 1.24 | 6 | 74.8% (2014/15) | 85.6% (2019/20) |
| Under 3.5 goals | 64.7% | 1.54 | 7 | 57.2% (2024/25) | 72.5% (2005/06) |
| Over 2.5 goals | 57.2% | 1.75 | 10 | 50.0% (2005/06) | 65.0% (2019/20) |
| Under 2.5 goals | 42.8% | 2.34 | 14 | 35.0% (2019/20) | 50.0% (2005/06) |
Longer runs come naturally with lower hit rates and more bets. Even so, the difference in comfort between these lines is real, and it should shape how you size your stakes.
ยง 3Under 3.5 has drifted lower across recent seasons
Season by season, the two steady lines move in opposite directions. Under 3.5 began at 72.5% in 2005/06 and recorded 57.2% in both 2024/25 and 2025/26. Over 1.5 has mostly sat in the low-to-mid eighties since 2018/19, peaking at 85.6% in 2019/20.
View the data: over 1.5 and under 3.5, season by season
| Over 1.5 goals | Under 3.5 goals | |
|---|---|---|
| 2005/06 | 78.8% | 72.5% |
| 2006/07 | 77.5% | 69.6% |
| 2007/08 | 76.5% | 69.3% |
| 2008/09 | 81.0% | 67.3% |
| 2009/10 | 76.5% | 68.0% |
| 2010/11 | 78.8% | 66.7% |
| 2011/12 | 78.1% | 66.0% |
| 2012/13 | 81.7% | 67.0% |
| 2013/14 | 84.6% | 61.1% |
| 2014/15 | 74.8% | 67.6% |
| 2015/16 | 77.5% | 66.0% |
| 2016/17 | 78.4% | 70.9% |
| 2017/18 | 78.8% | 69.3% |
| 2018/19 | 84.6% | 60.1% |
| 2019/20 | 85.6% | 58.5% |
| 2020/21 | 82.0% | 63.4% |
| 2021/22 | 83.3% | 60.8% |
| 2022/23 | 84.6% | 62.1% |
| 2023/24 | 85.3% | 58.8% |
| 2024/25 | 80.7% | 57.2% |
| 2025/26 | 83.7% | 57.2% |
I would not treat the long average of 64.7% for under 3.5 as today's number. The recent seasons sit well below it. For that line, fair odds based on the full period are probably too generous a guide to what is fair now.
ยง 4Over 2.5 prices have tracked reality closely
This chart compares the margin-free price for over 2.5 with how often it landed, split by the size of the over price. Overall, over 2.5 was priced at 56.4% and landed 57.2%, so the market has been well calibrated. In the 1.70โ1.89 band, the priced and landed figures are both 52.9%.
View the data: over 2.5: priced vs landed, by over price
| Priced | Landed | 95% range | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Over <1.50 (1,078 matches) | 68.4% | 72.1% | ยฑ2.7 |
| Over 1.50โ1.69 (2,166 matches) | 58.9% | 59.7% | ยฑ2.1 |
| Over 1.70โ1.89 (1,971 matches) | 52.9% | 52.9% | ยฑ2.2 |
| Over 1.90โ2.09 (925 matches) | 47.9% | 48.3% | ยฑ3.2 |
| Over 2.10+ (278 matches) | 42.9% | 40.6% | ยฑ5.8 |
The edges are more interesting. When over 2.5 was priced below 1.50, it landed 72.1% against 68.4% priced, across 1,078 matches. When it was 2.10+, it landed 40.6% against 42.9% priced, though that sample of 278 matches comes with a wide margin of error.
ยง 5Neither side of 2.5 beat the margin overall
Once you account for the bookmaker's margin, being right more often than the price suggests still did not produce a profit. The best over band was the shortest, below 1.50, at โ0.5%. The best under band came when the over was priced 2.10+, at โ1.4%. Backing the under when the over was below 1.50 produced the heaviest loss anywhere on the chart.
Across individual years, under 2.5 made a profit in 2 of 21 seasons and over 2.5 in 4 of 21. My main caveat is this: returns this close to zero can come from chance alone over a few thousand bets. None of these bands is a system, and over 1.5 and under 3.5 have no price history here, so there are no returns to judge them on.
Historical flat-stake return, not a forecast.
View the data: backing over or under 2.5, by over price
| Back over 2.5 | Back under 2.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Over <1.50 | โ0.5% | โ16.5% |
| Over 1.50โ1.69 | โ4.7% | โ8.0% |
| Over 1.70โ1.89 | โ5.6% | โ5.7% |
| Over 1.90โ2.09 | โ4.7% | โ6.3% |
| Over 2.10+ | โ10.2% | โ1.4% |
| All matches | โ4.5% | โ8.2% |
Almanac verdict
- Compare prices with fair odds
- Over 1.5 has a fair price of 1.24 and under 3.5 has 1.54. If you are offered less than that, the price is not giving you an edge on history alone.
- Discount the long-run under
- Under 3.5 averages 64.7% over the full period but recorded 57.2% in each of the last two seasons. Weight recent seasons more heavily before you back it.
- Avoid under against short overs
- When the over 2.5 was priced below 1.50, backing the under gave the worst return on the chart, far worse than the โ8.2% for all unders. The short price was, if anything, not short enough.
Questions bettors ask
How often do Bundesliga matches go over 1.5 goals?
Across 6,426 matches from 2005/06 to 2025/26, 80.6% had two or more goals, which gives fair odds of 1.24. That is the second-highest rate of the 20 divisions in this series.
Is over 2.5 profitable in the Bundesliga?
Not at flat stakes. Backing every over 2.5 at the main price returned โ4.5%, although the shortest band, below 1.50, came close to breaking even at โ0.5%.
What is the longest losing run on over 1.5 in the Bundesliga?
Over 1.5 never lost more than 6 matches in a row across the whole period. Under 3.5's worst run was 7, compared with 10 for over 2.5 and 14 for under 2.5.
I'm Nurul Adira, based in Phuket, and I write the best-bet selections at fixed-match.tips โ the highest-confidence calls of the week, framed honestly around value and staking rather than false guarantees.
View profile โ
