Traditional uptime data measures how much of a match a sportsbook is available for. Wagering-weighted uptime asks a different and commercially more important question: was the operator available during the periods of the match when betting activity was at its greatest?
Bettormetrics’ US Open analysis demonstrates how wagering activity can reveal whether sportsbooks are available when it matters most. With prediction market data being added alongside its existing exchange data, Bettormetrics can apply this commercially weighted view of performance across an expanding range of sports and markets, opening up a far richer understanding of betting patterns and operator performance, particularly in the US.
Why conventional uptime can mislead
Uptime is usually reported as a proportion of match duration: the share of time a market was live, regardless of how much money was moving through the wider market at any given moment.
It is a reasonable long-run efficiency measure, but it treats every stage of a match as equally important, even though wagering activity is not distributed evenly through an event. A sportsbook that is unavailable for the same length of time during a quiet first set and during a deciding tie-break receives the same duration-based penalty, despite the two periods having markedly different commercial significance.
A sportsbook can therefore report excellent uptime across the length of an event while being unavailable during the periods in which wagering is heaviest. A technically strong uptime percentage does not, on its own, show that an operator was available during the most commercially important moments.
How Bettormetrics measures it
Bettormetrics compared operator pricing and availability with exchange pricing and matched wagering activity across 39 in-play men’s singles matches at the US Open and 18 operators.
Performance was measured in two ways. By duration, each metric is the proportion of total match time for which it applied. By wagering, it is the proportion of exchange matched wagering that took place while that condition held. Wagering-weighted uptime, for example, is the share of exchange wagering transacted while an operator’s markets are live.
The data source matters. The US Open analysis uses exchange pricing and wagering data. Exchange wagering is not the same as sportsbook wagering and it cannot be used to directly calculate an operator’s actual lost revenue.
However, it does provide an independent, market-derived indication of when betting activity was concentrated, and therefore when sportsbook availability was very likely to matter most. Traditional betting exchanges and prediction markets are both exchange-based environments that produce market-derived pricing and wagering signals. Provided there is sufficient liquidity, the same methodology can therefore be applied to both.
For this analysis, “theoretical arbitrage” means that at least one sportsbook selection was priced so that a customer could theoretically back it profitably against the exchange. It does not mean that every opportunity was verified as executable.
LeoVegas: the clearest demonstration
LeoVegas posted a duration-weighted uptime of 97.8%, solidly in the upper half of the field and in line with Superbet, Paddy Power and Hard Rock. Its wagering-weighted uptime was 88.3%: the lowest of any operator in the sample and the only one below 90%. The 9.5-percentage-point gap between the two figures is more than double the next-largest gap in the field.
The Zverev vs Tabilo match makes the point particularly clear. LeoVegas was available for 98.5% of that match by duration, but only during periods accounting for 61.5% of exchange wagering activity. An operator that looked close to flawless on the conventional measure was therefore unavailable during periods that accounted for more than a third of the exchange betting in that fixture.
The pattern is consistent with LeoVegas’ downtime being concentrated in the moments of heaviest wagering, which is exactly what a duration-based measure cannot show.