March Madness Upsets: How to Spot Them with These Integral Trends

• Watching favorites fall in March Madness is all the more exciting when you have money on the underdog
• Looking at past results, we examine some commonalities among NCAA Tournament upsets
• While the most recent tournament finished chalky, there were still early-round upsets that were pretty obvious in hindsight

March Madness has such a broad allure, in part, because of the prevailing feeling that anything can happen. That feeling became all the more prevalent after UMBC, a No. 16 seed, demolished No. 1 overall seed Virginia in 2018, which was the first time a No. 1 seed had lost in 136 games.

While it’s easy to predict that there will be chaos in the bracket every year, it’s a lot harder to pinpoint where the chaos will arise. Is there any way to spot March Madness upsets-in-the-making with 100% accuracy? Of course not. But looking at past results, there are certain identifiable traits and trends that are present in an alarming number of NCAA Tournament upsets.

Here are the four trends our research has identified.

NB: in this article, the term “Power Six conferences” refers to the ACC, Big 12, Big East, Big Ten, (former) Pac-12, and SEC.

6 Upset Picks for the 2026 NCAA Tournament

1. Fade Mid-Majors with a Top-Five Seed

Over the last decade, mid-majors that get a top-five seed have been upset at a startling rate, especially the ones not named Gonzaga.

In the last 11 tournaments, 17 non-Gonzaga mid-majors have received a top-five seed. Seven of those lost in the first round. Nine more lost in the second round, and every one of them lost against the spread (ATS), as well.

Before Houston’s run of success in 2021, the only one of these teams that advanced to the Sweet 16 was No. 4 SDSU in 2014, which went 2-1 ATS in its three games.

Fading these mid-majors on the moneyline in the first round has been profitable. Fading them ATS in each of the first two rounds has been, as well.

2. Decade-Long Trend Says Look Out for No. 11 Seeds

In general, the better a team’s seed, the less likely it is to lose in the first round. Strictly looking at historical statistics, No. 1s are less likely to lose than No. 2s, while No. 2s are less likely to lose than No. 3s, and so on.

That holds true for every seed-line, as illustrated in our “Most Common March Madness First-Round Upsets” article.

Though, that wasn’t actually the case until recently. For years, No. 12 seeds were winning at a higher rate than No. 11 seeds. But the No. 11s have been on a tear over the last nine NCAA Tournaments and now have a better all-time win-rate than the No. 12s (37.6% vs. 31%).

Not only have they surpassed No. 12s in terms of all-time wins in the first round, but they are also tied with No. 10s (each at 62). Even after going 1-3 a year ago, No. 11 seeds are 18-18 over the past nine years.

With Drake’s win in 2025, No. 11 seeds have now won at least one game in 20 straight tournaments. The last time the No. 11 seeds were shutout in the first round was 2004. Compare that to No. 12s, which went 0-4 in 2007, 2015, 2018.

Obviously, you don’t want to blindly follow a trend from a sample size this small. So is there something causing it that we can get behind?

Recent No. 11 Over No. 6 ‘Upsets’

Seven of those matchups (the ones in bold) involve a mid-major team upsetting a Power Six team. Six involve a mid-major on the losing end. If and when you see a solid mid-major against a sub-elite Power Conference team, history says an upset could be in the making.

3. Trust Advanced Stat Rankings Over Seeding

There is always some disparity between the Selection Committee’s seedings, which aim to reward teams for their work to date, and the rankings at KenPom.com (a popular analytics website), which aim to predict future outcomes.

One trend that has waned in recent years is KenPom teams ranked in the top 35 who were seeded 11th or worse. Those teams were out-performing their seed by a healthy margin in the 2010s, but the last four that qualified all lost in the Round of 64.

This could be because the bracket makers are becoming more in tune with advanced stats, or it could be a blip.

But if you’re looking at individual matchups, trust KenPom over seed. In 2025, Memphis was ranked No. 54 by KenPom and given a No. 5 seed. It played 42nd ranked and 12th-seeded Colorado State. While the result was a seeded upset, those who checked KenPom (and the sportsbooks, who had CSU favored by 1.5), were not fooled.

4. Finding No. 1 and No. 2 Seeds Ripe for an Upset

Correctly betting on a No. 1 or No. 2 seed to lose in the first round will obviously result in a huge return. But it doesn’t happen often, so you have to be very discerning to make this a winning strategy longterm.

There have been just nine No. 1 and No. 2 seeds that have been upset since 2001. These teams don’t share any single trait in common (apart from the losing), but there are a couple of things that stand out.

Four (2021 Ohio State, 2013 Georgetown, 2012 Duke, and 2012 Missouri) were ranked 79th or worse in either offensive or defensive efficiency. While three more (2023 Purdue, 2018 UVA, and 2016 MSU) played at incredibly slow tempos.

No. 1 & No. 2 Seeds That Suffered 1st-Round Upsets

When trying to identify a No. 1 or No. 2 seed that’s vulnerable, look for a team that is considerably weaker at one end of the court and plays slowly.

The reason why slow-tempo teams are more prone to upsets is pretty simple; a slower tempo means fewer possessions, and the fewer possessions there are in a game, the greater the likelihood that a less talented team will be able to play to the level of a high-caliber opponent.

To put it another way, it reduces the number of opportunities for the better team to be better.

It’s not every year that a No. 1 or No. 2 seed has an offense/defense that ranks relatively low compared to its top-seeded brethren. But when you see one that does, take a longer look at their matchup in the first round, especially if it’s a team that plays at a plodding pace.

Quick March Madness Upset Checklist

Here are some general clues to look for when trying to identify upsets in the NCAA Tournament:

• Check the spread: Sportsbooks don’t always agree with seeding, so if you see a No. 11 or No. 12 favored over its No. 6 or No. 5 opponent, it’s for a good reason. Even if a spread is closer than the seed would indicate, it’s something to investigate further.
• Look at free throw percentage: Does your possible Cinderella shoot 75% or better from the free throw line? If it’s leading down the stretch, that will be crucial to closing out the upset victory. And on the other end, is the favorite a poor free throw shooting team? That could be a recipe for a special March Madness moment.
• Location matters: Teams are assigned to first and second round sites based on what should be a geographical advantage for the top seed in a quadrant (seeds 1-4). That doesn’t always work out, of course, and it definitely doesn’t always work out for the teams seeded 5-8, who could find themselves playing the equivalent of a road game against their lower-seeded opponent. Home court advantage is huge in college basketball, and scrappy underdogs are going to already have the crowd on their side, so playing close to home could ultimately be the difference.

March Madness Upsets FAQs

Where to Bet on March Madness

Now that you know some of the hallmarks of March Madness upsets, head over to our sportsbook reviews, find the betting site that’s best for you and try your hand at betting on college basketball at our favorite March Madness betting apps. You can click through our links below to claim March Madness betting promos and build your bankroll.

But always remember: never, ever, under any circumstances wager more than you can afford to lose.

If you’re in search of more statistically oriented March Madness betting tips, head over to our strategy section. We touch on everything from perennial traits of March Madness champions, to key final four trends.