HT/FT Correct Score Double: The Score Paths That Land Most Often
Calling the half-time and full-time score together is a narrow target. Here is which score paths land most often across European leagues, and what a fair price for each looks like.
The HT/FT correct score double asks you to name two exact scores in one match: the score at the break and the score at the final whistle. It is one of the hardest markets on the coupon, and the prices reflect that. I wanted to see which score paths actually turn up most, so I studied 183,622 league matches with half-time scores across 22 European divisions, 2000/01-2025/26.
The headline answer is 0-0 → 0-0, which lands in 7.9% of matches. Behind it sit 606 different paths, and the 10 most common cover only 42.5% of games. If you come to this market from my free football tips, treat it as a different animal from a straight correct score. The target is narrower, so fair prices are longer and patience matters more.
Period 1Goalless first halves feed the most common score paths
This chart ranks the 14 most common half-time → full-time scores, home goals first. The goalless first half is the starting point for the top two, 0-0 → 0-0 at 7.9% and 0-0 → 1-0 at 6.0%, and for several more near the top, including 0-0 → 0-1 at 4.4% and 0-0 → 1-1. That matches what I see on the pitch: plenty of sides spend the opening period probing and keeping their shape rather than committing numbers forward.
The other pattern is how often nothing changes after the break. In 22.5% of matches the half-time score was also the final score, which is why 1-0 → 1-0 at 4.6% and 0-1 → 0-1 sit so high. When a lead does grow, 1-0 → 2-0 at 4.0% is the most common way it happens.
183,622 matches; 606 different score paths seen.
View the data: the 14 most common half-time → full-time scores
| Share of all matches, home score first | |
|---|---|
| 0-0 → 0-0 | 7.9% |
| 0-0 → 1-0 | 6.0% |
| 1-0 → 1-0 | 4.6% |
| 0-0 → 0-1 | 4.4% |
| 1-0 → 2-0 | 4.0% |
| 0-0 → 1-1 | 3.8% |
| 0-1 → 0-1 | 3.3% |
| 1-0 → 1-1 | 3.2% |
| 0-1 → 1-1 | 3.0% |
| 1-0 → 2-1 | 2.4% |
| 1-1 → 1-1 | 2.4% |
| 0-0 → 2-0 | 2.4% |
| 0-1 → 0-2 | 2.3% |
| 1-1 → 2-1 | 2.0% |
What I take from this is that the market rewards a cautious read of the first half. The busy, end-to-end paths fans picture are real, but they are spread thinly across a long tail.
Period 2Fair odds start at 12.62 and lengthen quickly
The table turns each share into a fair decimal price, simply 1 divided by how often the path happened, with no margin. The top path, 0-0 → 0-0, has fair odds of 12.62, roughly 1 in 13. By the second row, 0-0 → 1-0, the fair price is already 16.71. By the bottom of the table, three paths are bunched together: 1-0 → 2-1 at 40.86, 1-1 → 1-1 at 41.37 and 0-0 → 2-0 at 41.68.
That bunching matters. Once you are past the first handful, the gaps between neighbouring paths are small, so a modest change in how a specific match is likely to unfold can reorder them.
| HT → FT | Matches | Share | 1 in | Fair odds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0-0 → 0-0 | 14,548 | 7.9% | 13 | 12.62 |
| 0-0 → 1-0 | 10,992 | 6.0% | 17 | 16.71 |
| 1-0 → 1-0 | 8,408 | 4.6% | 22 | 21.84 |
| 0-0 → 0-1 | 8,060 | 4.4% | 23 | 22.78 |
| 1-0 → 2-0 | 7,265 | 4.0% | 25 | 25.27 |
| 0-0 → 1-1 | 6,926 | 3.8% | 27 | 26.51 |
| 0-1 → 0-1 | 6,033 | 3.3% | 30 | 30.44 |
| 1-0 → 1-1 | 5,854 | 3.2% | 31 | 31.37 |
| 0-1 → 1-1 | 5,507 | 3.0% | 33 | 33.34 |
| 1-0 → 2-1 | 4,494 | 2.4% | 41 | 40.86 |
| 1-1 → 1-1 | 4,439 | 2.4% | 41 | 41.37 |
| 0-0 → 2-0 | 4,406 | 2.4% | 42 | 41.68 |
The main caveat, in my own words: these are averages across many matches, not forecasts for the next one. Even the best path misses far more often than it lands, so a short losing run tells you very little, and a price only offers value if it beats the fair odds for that particular match, not for the average one.
Period 3Score paths spread far wider than full-time scores
This line chart shows how much of the outcome space you cover as you add more picks, comparing plain full-time scores with score paths. The single best full-time score, 1-1, covers 12.4% of matches, while the best score path covers 7.9%. The gap widens as you add picks: the 10 most common full-time scores cover 75.7%, against 42.5% for the 10 most common paths.
Score paths keep climbing slowly. The top 20 reach 61.1%, and it takes the top 40 to reach 78.5%, by which point full-time scores have reached 99.7%.
X axis = number of most common outcomes included.
View the data: how many picks cover the outcomes?
| Full-time score | HT → FT score path | |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 12.4% | 7.9% |
| 2 | 22.9% | 13.9% |
| 3 | 31.8% | 18.5% |
| 5 | 47.4% | 26.8% |
| 10 | 75.7% | 42.5% |
| 15 | 88.8% | 53.5% |
| 20 | 94.8% | 61.1% |
| 25 | 97.6% | 67.1% |
| 30 | 98.9% | 71.5% |
| 40 | 99.7% | 78.5% |
For a bettor this is the key structural fact. Spreading stakes across several paths buys coverage at a much worse rate than doing the same with full-time scores, so I would only do it with a clear tactical reason behind each line.
Period 4The home price shifts which score path leads
Here the matches are split by the pre-match home-win price, showing the top three paths in each band. With a strong home favourite priced under 1.50, the goalless draw drops out of the top spot: 0-0 → 1-0 leads at 6.5%, with 1-0 → 2-0 close behind at 6.3%, across 17,596 matches. At home odds of 1.50–1.99, 0-0 → 0-0 at 7.6% only narrowly heads 0-0 → 1-0 at 7.1%.
In the evenly priced 2.00–2.79 band, which is the largest at 73,747 matches, 0-0 → 0-0 is strongest of all at 9.1%. When the home side is priced 4.00+, the away mirror takes over: 0-0 → 0-1 at 7.1%, then 0-0 → 0-0 at 6.1%, over 13,682 matches.
| Home odds | Matches | Most common | 2nd | 3rd |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Home < 1.50 | 17,596 | 0-0 → 1-0 (6.5%) | 1-0 → 2-0 (6.3%) | 1-0 → 1-0 (5.4%) |
| Home 1.50–1.99 | 51,042 | 0-0 → 0-0 (7.6%) | 0-0 → 1-0 (7.1%) | 1-0 → 1-0 (5.4%) |
| Home 2.00–2.79 | 73,747 | 0-0 → 0-0 (9.1%) | 0-0 → 1-0 (6.2%) | 0-0 → 0-1 (4.8%) |
| Home 2.80–3.99 | 24,592 | 0-0 → 0-0 (8.4%) | 0-0 → 0-1 (5.9%) | 0-0 → 1-0 (4.6%) |
| Home 4.00+ | 13,682 | 0-0 → 0-1 (7.1%) | 0-0 → 0-0 (6.1%) | 0-1 → 0-1 (5.3%) |
This is where tactical reading earns its keep. A balanced, cagey fixture leans toward the goalless path, while a clear mismatch leans toward the favourite edging a tight first half and then pulling away.
Full-time verdict
In closely priced matches, 0-0 → 0-0 is the benchmark at 9.1% in the 2.00–2.79 home band. Any other path you back should come with a reason to expect goals.
Even the top path has fair odds of 12.62, and by rank 12 you are near 41.68. Only take a price if it clearly beats what you judge fair for that specific match.
The top 10 paths cover just 42.5% of matches, against 75.7% for the top 10 full-time scores. Covering several paths costs far more than covering several plain scores.
Questions bettors ask
What is the most common HT/FT correct score?
Across 183,622 European league matches, 0-0 at half-time and 0-0 at full-time was the most common path at 7.9%. Its fair odds are 12.62, roughly 1 in 13.
How often is the half-time score the same as the final score?
In 22.5% of matches the half-time score was also the final score, meaning the second half was goalless. That is why paths like 1-0 → 1-0 at 4.6% rank so highly.
What is the most likely HT/FT score when the home team is a big favourite?
With the home side priced under 1.50, the most common path was 0-0 → 1-0 at 6.5%, just ahead of 1-0 → 2-0 at 6.3%. That band covered 17,596 matches.
I'm Kenji Nakamura, and I cover football free tips at correct-score.vip — focusing on the tactical detail behind each match rather than the hype around it.
View profile →
