So far this season, the Covers Anytime TD Value Index No. 1 pick has gotten into the end zone in three of four weeks, with an average probability just over 29%.
The value has been located, guys.
Let’s cut the pre-dinner chat and backslapping, and get straight into the main course: here are the best Anytime TD Scorer predictions for NFL Week 5.
Best anytime TD scorer predictions this week
For help understanding Kalshi probabilities, please see our odds calculator.
| Player |  Probability |
Index Score | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | D'Andre Swift (  vs. ) |
RB | 47% | 92 |
| 2 | Jahmyr Gibbs (  vs. ) |
RB | 78% | 92 |
| 3 | Bhayshul Tuten (  vs. ) |
RB | 49% | 91 |
| 4 | Cameron Skattebo (  vs. ) |
RB | 50% | 91 |
| 5 | James Cook (  vs. ) |
RB | 54% | 90 |
| 6 | Sam LaPorta ( vs.) |
TE | 35% | 90 |
| 7 | Christian McCaffrey (  vs. ) |
RB | 56% | 90 |
| 8 | Amon-Ra St. Brown ( vs.) |
WR | 57% | 90 |
| 9 | Michael Wilson ( vs.) |
WR | 35% | 88 |
| 10 | Ashton Jeanty (  vs. ) |
RB | 50% | 87 |
| 11 | Luther Burden III ( vs.) |
WR | 26% | 87 |
| 12 | Bucky Irving (  vs. ) |
RB | 32% | 85 |
| 13 | MarShawn Lloyd ( vs.) |
RB | 39% | 84 |
| 14 | Trey McBride ( vs.) |
TE | 43% | 84 |
| 15 | Jacory Croskey-Merritt ( vs.) |
RB | 44% | 83 |
| 16 | Deebo Samuel Sr. ( vs.) |
WR | 29% | 82 |
| 17 | Colston Loveland ( vs.) |
TE | 29% | 81 |
| 18 | Omarion Hampton (  vs. ) |
RB | 35% | 80 |
| 19 | Kaelon Black ( vs.) |
RB | 11% | 80 |
| 20 | Mike Evans ( vs.) |
WR | 31% | 80 |
| 21 | Rome Odunze ( vs.) |
WR | 27% | 80 |
| 22 | Josh Allen ( vs.) |
QB | 54% | 80 |
| 23 | Tony Pollard (  vs. ) |
RB | 28% | 78 |
| 24 | T.J. Hockenson (  vs. ) |
TE | 22% | 78 |
| 25 | Derrick Henry (  vs. ) |
RB | 57% | 78 |
Accurate as of October 2. Percentages courtesy of Kalshi, one of the best prediction market apps
Start trading with Kalshi today!
Sign up now using our Kalshi promo code 'MAX60' and trade $25 on any event contracts to get $60!
*Eligible U.S. locations only
Best Week 5 anytime TD predictions
D’Andre Swift | RB 47%
-
The Market Illusion: “Kyle Monangai has turned Chicago’s backfield into a committee, making Swift too risky at a near-even probability.”
-
The Structural Reality: Swift remains the Bears’ leading runner through four games, recording 69 carries for 311 yards and three touchdowns. His 20 red-zone opportunities also lead the backfield, although Monangai’s 15 confirm that the touchdown role is shared rather than monopolized. Swift has played 57.3% of the offensive snaps and handled approximately 45.7% of Chicago’s carries.
Green Bay ranks 14th in total defense and has conceded 13 touchdowns. Chicago’s 24-point implied total supports multiple scoring opportunities, while Swift can convert through a conventional carry, outside run or reception. His receiving role gives him an additional path that Monangai does not possess to the same extent.
At 47%, Swift must score once every 2.13 games. That is an aggressive threshold, particularly with Monangai capable of finishing drives. Nevertheless, Swift’s red-zone volume, versatile usage and favorable team total support his 92 index score. He is a strong candidate, although the price leaves little protection against a backfield split.
Jahmyr Gibbs | RB 78%
-
The Market Illusion: “Detroit’s enormous team total and Gibbs’ five rushing touchdowns make him virtually certain to score against Arizona.”
-
The Structural Reality: Gibbs has the strongest raw touchdown profile in this group. He has played 78.3% of Detroit’s offensive snaps, handled 83.6% of the team’s running-back carries and accumulated 27 red-zone opportunities. Through four games, he has converted 80 carries into 353 yards and five rushing touchdowns.
Gibbs also has a legitimate receiving route to the end zone. He has caught four of five red-zone targets and scored twice on those receptions. That dual-purpose role is especially valuable with Detroit carrying a 30-point implied total against an Arizona defense ranked 24th in total yardage, with 15 touchdowns conceded.
At 78%, Gibbs needs to score once every 1.28 games. His probability of scoring is unquestionably high, but the market is charging accordingly. The central risk is not his role; it is paying a premium for a volatile event. Gibbs’ 92 index score reflects exceptional usage and environment, while his 30/35 market-value score acknowledges that much of the advantage is already embedded in the price.
Bhayshul Tuten | RB 49%
-
The Market Illusion: “Tuten’s emergence as Jacksonville’s lead runner makes a touchdown more likely than not whenever the Jaguars are favored.”
-
The Structural Reality: Tuten is averaging 15 carries and 69.3 rushing yards through four games, giving him the workload required to benefit from a favorable game script. Through Week 3, he had six red-zone carries to Chris Rodriguez’s five. That narrow margin establishes Tuten as the leading candidate without giving him complete ownership of Jacksonville’s short-yardage work.
Philadelphia ranks 21st in total defense and has allowed 11 touchdowns. Jacksonville’s 24.75-point implied total is encouraging, but Tuten’s limited receiving involvement makes him more dependent on rushing opportunities inside the 10 than Swift or Gibbs. Rodriguez can also absorb precisely the carries that matter most for this market.
At 49%, Tuten needs to score once every 2.04 games. The combination of projected game control and a lead rushing role makes him one of the best week 5 anytime TD bets, but the probability is no bargain. His 91 index score is driven by opportunity and team context; a reduced goal-line share would quickly weaken the case.
Sam LaPorta | TE 35%
-
The Market Illusion: “Detroit has too many established scorers for LaPorta to receive a dependable share of its touchdowns.”
-
The Structural Reality: LaPorta’s condensed-field usage separates him from an ordinary secondary receiver. He has played 87.5% of Detroit’s offensive snaps, drawn a 19.3% target share and accumulated nine red-zone opportunities. His official red-zone line contains nine targets, five receptions and two touchdowns, with seven of those targets coming from inside the 10.
Arizona’s defense has conceded 15 touchdowns and ranks 24th in total defense. More importantly, Detroit is projected to score approximately 30 points. Amon-Ra St. Brown and Gibbs command significant portions of the offense, but a high expected touchdown total creates enough scoring inventory for several Lions to remain viable.
At 35%, LaPorta must score once every 2.86 games. That threshold is considerably more attractive than Gibbs’ 78% price, particularly given LaPorta’s repeated opportunities inside the 10. His 90 index score reflects an excellent convergence of red-zone usage, matchup and team scoring context. Target competition remains the principal risk.
Luther Burden III | WR 26%
-
The Market Illusion: “Burden is still a complementary receiver whose touchdown production depends on broken plays rather than designed scoring opportunities.”
-
The Structural Reality: Burden’s role has expanded beyond that description. He has averaged a 61.8% snap share while commanding 23.6% of Chicago’s targets, the largest target share among the Bears’ primary pass catchers. He has drawn five official red-zone targets, converting two into receptions and one into a touchdown. Two of those opportunities originated inside the 10.
Chicago’s 24-point implied total provides a workable scoring environment against a Green Bay defense that has allowed 13 touchdowns. Burden’s ability after the catch also means he does not need every opportunity to originate near the goal line.
At 26%, Burden needs to score once every 3.85 games. That is a forgiving threshold for a receiver earning nearly one-quarter of the targets. Rome Odunze, Colston Loveland and Chicago’s running backs create substantial competition, but Burden’s combination of market price and ascending usage makes him more attractive than a conventional secondary receiver.
Josh Allen | QB 54%
-
The Market Illusion: “Seven rushing touchdowns through four games prove Allen should be priced above 50% to score every week.”
-
The Structural Reality: Allen’s current touchdown rate will regress, but his underlying goal-line mechanism remains unusually strong. He has recorded eight red-zone carries, including six inside the 10, and leads the NFL with seven rushing touchdowns. Buffalo has scored on 51.2% of its offensive drives, repeatedly placing Allen in situations where a scramble, sneak or designed run can finish the possession.
The matchup represents the primary concern. Los Angeles ranks second in total defense and has allowed only nine touchdowns. Buffalo still carries a healthy 25.75-point implied total, but the Rams should create fewer clean goal-line situations than most opponents.
At 54.5%, Allen needs to score once every 1.83 games. His short-yardage authority makes that plausible, but the price asks bettors to trust an exceptionally high conversion rate against an elite defense. His 80 index score correctly rewards the role while applying a meaningful matchup penalty. This is a wager on repeatable usage, not on his seven-touchdown pace continuing indefinitely.
T.J. Hockenson | TE 22%
-
The Market Illusion: “Hockenson is primarily an underneath receiver and does not command enough end-zone work behind Minnesota’s wide receivers.”
-
The Structural Reality: Hockenson has played 75.8% of Minnesota’s offensive snaps and drawn a 26% target share. He is averaging 6.5 targets per game and has converted three of four official red-zone targets into 28 yards and one touchdown. That involvement gives him both volume-driven and touchdown-specific routes to outperform a modest market probability.
New Orleans ranks 26th in total defense, has conceded 16 touchdowns and has allowed points on 50% of opposing possessions. Minnesota’s 22-point implied total is not exceptional, but the matchup should produce sustained drives and opportunities for Hockenson against linebackers and safeties.
At 22%, Hockenson needs to score once every 4.55 games. That is the most forgiving break-even requirement in this group. Justin Jefferson, Jordan Addison and Aaron Jones limit his share of Minnesota’s touchdowns, but the matchup and target volume make Hockenson one of the price-sensitive best Week 5 anytime TD bets rather than merely a speculative tight-end selection.
Use Promo Code MAX60
Week 5 anytime touchdown props to avoid
Every week, the Covers Anytime Touchdown Value Index flags the five worst Anytime Touchdown propositions on the board. We aren't talking about the longest odds or the lowest raw probabilities.
We are talking about toxic ROI. These are the spots where the public narrative has inflated the price so severely that the bet is mathematically dead on arrival.
If you are looking for the kind of return on investment you get when you trade a future 2nd round pick for the worst OL in football (we're looking at you, Baltimore Ravens): these are your picks.
| Player | Position | Probability |
Index Score | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cody White ( vs.) |
WR | 15% | 47 | Sparse routes require coverage bust or injury. |
| C.J. Stroud ( vs.) |
QB | 14% | 43 | Passing-first profile leaves little designed rushing equity. |
| Jaleel McLaughlin (  vs. ) |
RB | 6% | 40 | Crowded backfield blocks dependable short-yardage opportunities. |
| Olamide Zaccheaus ( vs.) |
WR | 8% | 40 | Low-volume routes demand exceptional touchdown efficiency. |
| Marquez Valdes-Scantling ( vs.) |
WR | 7% | 39 | Deep-only role creates volatile, low-frequency scoring path. |
NFL Week 5 best anytime touchdown bets by position
If you are strictly a running back investor, or you only play tight end markets: we have you covered. The index slices the board by position, giving you the top ten clearest value plays across every skill group, ensuring you aren't just betting blindly into a crowded market.
Top 10 quarterback TD props for Week 5
| Player | Probability |
Index Score | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|
| Josh Allen ( vs.) |
54% | 80 | Elite quarterback goal-line usage offsets brutal matchup. |
| Drake Maye ( vs.) |
18% | 77 | Scrambling upside meets favorable red-zone resistance. |
| Jacoby Brissett ( vs.) |
14% | 75 | Cheap rushing path against porous Detroit defense. |
| Tyson Bagent ( vs.) |
14% | 73 | Mobility offers upside, but starting role fragile. |
| Justin Herbert ( vs.) |
13% | 70 | Low price compensates for difficult Denver matchup. |
| Jalen Hurts ( vs.) |
33% | 69 | Signature sneak equity survives weak team total. |
| Trevor Lawrence ( vs.) |
23% | 69 | Designed runs supplement Jacksonville’s strong scoring outlook. |
| Brock Purdy ( vs.) |
14% | 68 | Occasional scrambles gain appeal versus Seattle. |
| Jalon Daniels ( vs.) |
25% | 67 | Athletic rushing profile carries meaningful goal-line appeal. |
| Daniel Jones (  vs. ) |
14% | 66 | Red-zone mobility creates value beyond passing production. |
Top 10 running back TD props for Week 5
| Player | Probability |
Index Score | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|
| D'Andre Swift ( vs.) |
47% | 92 | Leading Chicago’s scoring backfield despite committee pressure. |
| Jahmyr Gibbs ( vs.) |
78% | 92 | Massive team total amplifies dominant touchdown workload. |
| Bhayshul Tuten ( vs.) |
49% | 91 | Favored game script strengthens primary rushing role. |
| Cameron Skattebo ( vs.) |
50% | 91 | Near-exclusive goal-line work outweighs modest team total. |
| James Cook ( vs.) |
54% | 90 | Heavy scoring usage meets elite Rams defense. |
| Christian McCaffrey ( vs.) |
56% | 90 | Dual-threat workload preserves multiple touchdown routes. |
| Ashton Jeanty ( vs.) |
50% | 87 | Goal-line dominance tempered by middling scoring environment. |
| Bucky Irving ( vs.) |
32% | 85 | Discounted lead-back price despite weak team projection. |
| MarShawn Lloyd ( vs.) |
39% | 84 | Backfield lead offers value against stout Chicago. |
| Jacory Croskey-Merritt ( vs.) |
44% | 83 | Secure short-yardage role supported by healthy total. |
Top 10 wide receiver TD props for Week 5
| Player | Probability |
Index Score | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|
| Amon-Ra St. Brown ( vs.) |
57% | 90 | Premier end-zone target anchors explosive Detroit offense. |
| Michael Wilson ( vs.) |
35% | 88 | High-volume role attacks league-worst Detroit secondary. |
| Luther Burden III ( vs.) |
26% | 87 | Ascending target share meets favorable divisional matchup. |
| Deebo Samuel Sr. ( vs.) |
29% | 82 | Rushing versatility adds insurance to receiving equity. |
| Mike Evans ( vs.) |
31% | 80 | Proven contested-catch threat remains underpriced near goal. |
| Rome Odunze ( vs.) |
27% | 80 | End-zone involvement trails growing overall target volume. |
| Parker Washington ( vs.) |
36% | 77 | Elevated route share supports price; matchup complicates. |
| Isaac TeSlaa ( vs.) |
17% | 76 | Explosive offense creates chances despite secondary role. |
| Courtland Sutton ( vs.) |
32% | 75 | Trusted boundary target faces concentrated coverage risk. |
| Romeo Doubs ( vs.) |
34% | 75 | Established red-zone chemistry boosts otherwise ordinary projection. |
Top 10 tight end TD props for Week 5
| Player | Probability |
Index Score | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sam LaPorta ( vs.) |
35% | 90 | Seven inside-ten targets fuel elite scoring outlook. |
| Trey McBride ( vs.) |
43% | 84 | Heavy target concentration exploits vulnerable Detroit coverage. |
| Colston Loveland ( vs.) |
29% | 81 | Expanded routes combine with attractive game environment. |
| T.J. Hockenson ( vs.) |
22% | 78 | Volume-driven floor pairs with soft Saints defense. |
| George Kittle ( vs.) |
34% | 78 | Red-zone pedigree remains strong despite crowded offense. |
| Isaiah Likely ( vs.) |
27% | 77 | Athletic mismatch earns appeal against Washington linebackers. |
| Brenton Strange ( vs.) |
23% | 73 | Modest price reflects limited goal-line target ownership. |
| Hunter Henry ( vs.) |
29% | 73 | Reliable end-zone role draws premium matchup support. |
| Jake Ferguson ( vs.) |
28% | 72 | Strong scoring role undermined by hostile matchup. |
| Pat Freiermuth ( vs.) |
22% | 72 | Affordable intermediate target needs condensed-field opportunity. |
Use Promo Code MAX60
How we decide which Week 5 NFL anytime TDs to pick
Behind the Covers Anytime Touchdown Value Index is a screening matrix built on cold, structural math to help make the best anytime TD scorer predictions every week.
We don't care about media hype. We don't care who went viral on Sunday.
Our system runs a multi-layered data ingest, cross-referencing live play-by-play mechanics against odds from the sharpest sportsbooks in the world. We look at dozens of hyper-specific metrics, including:
| Player red-zone touches, inside the opponent’s 20-yard line | Weekly point spread |
| Player goal-to-go touches, approximated as touches inside the 5-yard line | Implied team total, derived from the total and spread |
| Player share of the team’s red-zone touches | Best available anytime-touchdown price |
| Player share of the team’s goal-to-go touches | Number of sportsbooks offering that price |
| Player red-zone touchdowns | Implied probability |
| Player red-zone touchdown rate per red-zone touch | Median market implied probability when multiple books are supplied |
| Team red-zone trips | Number of completed games played by the player’s team |
| Team offensive red-zone touchdown percentage | Prior-season weighting, used while the current-season sample develops |
| Opponent red-zone trips faced | Current injuries, availability, workload changes, and role stability |
| Opponent red-zone touchdown percentage allowed | Player position, team, opponent, and scheduled matchup |
| Weekly game total |
This isn't a black box running on mystery algorithms. It is a highly calibrated heuristic engine. We map our proprietary scoring against the market’s implied probability to isolate the exact friction points where pricing lags behind actual on-field volume. It is a premium, data-driven edge built to find the value before the market wakes up.
The lines are already moving. The public is currently throwing money at stale narratives. Trust the math and exploit the structural friction to secure your closing line value before kickoff.
Odds are correct at the time of publishing and are subject to change.
Not intended for use in MA.
Affiliate Disclosure: Our team of experts has thoroughly researched and handpicked each product that appears on our website. We may receive compensation if you sign up through our links.
