Among national-title contenders, the model fades Oregon and Notre Dame most: each trades at 11c on Kalshi against a fair value of 8.5%, roughly 2.5 cents of premium. The steepest relative markups sit lower on the board, where Oklahoma and Ole Miss change hands at 3c on a 2% fair value, close to a 50% premium.
The pattern is consistent. Every contract on the national-title board prices above the model's fair value, which is the expected footprint of market vig. The analytical task is not finding contracts the model likes; it is ranking how much premium each price carries and where the market is richest relative to the model's view.
Which title contenders does the model fade most?
In absolute terms, the premium concentrates at the top. Texas prices at 11c on an 8.9% fair value, a 2.1c gap. Oregon and Notre Dame each price at 11c on 8.5%, widening the gap to about 2.5c. Ohio State and Indiana both sit at 9c against 6.9%, and Miami at 8c against 6.1%.
Oregon and Notre Dame stand out because they share the same 11c price as Texas while the model rates them lower. The market is paying the top-tier price for the second tier of fair value, which is the cleanest contender-level fade on the board.
Georgia (7c on 5.3%) and LSU (6c on 4.9%) carry smaller absolute gaps, narrowing the premium as fair value falls. The contender fades are real but modest in cents; the larger distortions live among the longshots.
Where is the premium steepest in relative terms?
Absolute cents understate the longshot markup. A 3c price implies roughly 3% probability; against a 2% fair value, that is a premium near 50%. Oklahoma and Ole Miss both fit this profile, making them the steepest fades on a percentage basis even though the raw gap is only about a cent.
Texas A&M sits in between, pricing at 4c on a 2.8% fair value, a premium of more than 40%. The takeaway is structural: as fair value shrinks toward the bottom of the board, the relative markup grows, because the minimum tradeable increment is a larger share of a small number.
For a price-sensitive read, the model's strongest disagreement with the market is therefore at the bottom, not the top. Contenders are mildly rich; longshots are richest relative to their modeled odds.
How the fades stack up by price
The chart below ranks best price in cents across the top of the national-title board. The flat 11c shared by Texas, Oregon and Notre Dame is the visual signature of the contender fade: identical prices for teams the model separates on fair value.
The second chart shows the model's fair value for the same group, where Texas leads at 8.9% and the field compresses quickly beneath it.
What single-venue pricing means for the fade
These national-title contracts all source from Kalshi. With one venue, there is no consensus across exchanges to pull the price toward fair value, and no cheaper book to undercut the markup. The premium the model flags is the premium that stays in the line.
That changes how the edge is read. In multi-venue markets, the cheapest venue often trims the vig; here the Kalshi price is the only price, so the full distance between 11c and an 8.5% fair value is what the market is charging. Traders comparing venues can note the Kalshi FADE context, but on this board there is no second quote to arbitrage.
The model's fair value is an estimate and can be wrong; prices can move on liquidity and news. None of this is financial advice. The point is narrower: the market and the model disagree most on Oregon, Notre Dame and the cheap end of the board, and that is where the prices read richest.
