EV Validation

Foundations EV Backtest: Why Calculators Disagree, and How Ours Held Up to a Real Opening

People are right to be skeptical of sealed EV. The same Foundations box gets very different numbers from different calculators, and trust us is not an answer. This article does three things. First, it shows exactly how SpellBook Finance builds the EV number from published pull odds and card prices. Second, it explains why two honest calculators can disagree by almost 2x on the same box. Third, it checks our number against a real Foundations opening cohort, with realized sales, remaining card value at market, fees, and variance, plus a downloadable card list you can audit.

Set:
Foundations (FDN)
Product:
Play Booster Display
Updated:
2026-06-25

Result

Modeled full EV is 1.93x paid cost, or 1.58x market.

Of what these boxes produced so far, 0.25x is matched realized cash (78 sale rows for 97 sold cards) and 1.86x is live inventory plus unmatched sold-card fallback at market.

Honest read: the model looks close, but most of the result is inventory, not cash yet. Full breakdown below.

Part 1: how the EV number is built

Box EV is a computed number, not a guess. For Foundations Play Booster Displays, SpellBook Finance starts with Wizards' published Play Booster odds, reads MTGJSON's raw config and sheet weights, prices each exact printing, and sums the expected value contribution from every priced card.

Weight Source

The model starts with published slot odds, then uses MTGJSON sheet weights

Wizards publishes the Play Booster slot odds in Collecting Foundations. MTGJSON turns those odds into machine-readable config weights and card sheet weights; every weight shown here, including the 8 of 1,120 in the example, comes straight from the booster data in that file. This snapshot priced 803 of 1042 pullable card printings.

ConfigRaw weightProbabilityContents
Base pack788 / 100078.8%7 commons, 3 uncommons, 1 rare/mythic, 1 wildcard, 1 foil, 1 non-foil land
Special Guest pack12 / 10001.2%6 commons, 1 Special Guest, 3 uncommons, 1 rare/mythic, 1 wildcard, 1 foil, 1 non-foil land
Foil-land pack197 / 100019.7%7 commons, 3 uncommons, 1 rare/mythic, 1 wildcard, 1 foil, 1 foil land
Special Guest plus foil land3 / 10000.3%6 commons, 1 Special Guest, 3 uncommons, 1 rare/mythic, 1 wildcard, 1 foil, 1 foil land
SlotMTGJSON sheet weightPublished odds it encodes
Common slots80 cards, weight 1 each6 to 7 commons. Special Guest replaces one common in 1.5% of packs.
Uncommon slots101 cards, weight 1 each3 uncommons per pack.
Rare/mythic slot1,120 total sheet weightMain rares 78%, main mythics 12.8%, borderless rares 7.7%, borderless mythics 1.5%.
Non-foil wildcard509,040,000 total sheet weightCommons 16.7%, uncommons 58.3%, rares 16.3%, mythics 2.6%, plus borderless common, uncommon, rare, and mythic slices.
Traditional foil wildcard6,787,200 total sheet weightSame card range as the non-foil wildcard, flagged as foil in MTGJSON.
Land slot40 total sheet weight25% character lands, 50% common dual lands, 25% regular-frame basics. Foil in 20% of packs.

Example card

Doubling Season

Rare/mythic slot
8 / 1,120
Wildcard slot
756,288 / 509,040,000
Foil slot
7,272 / 6,787,200

Those three slot paths sum to 0.3492 expected copies per 36-pack display. At $32.48, that is $11.34 of EV.

card EV = expected copies per 36-pack display x current market price

Card-level EV contribution

The key audit unit is a single card contribution. If a card is worth $32.48 and the distribution expects about 0.349 copies per 36-pack display, that card contributes about $11.34 to display EV. The same arithmetic is repeated for every pullable priced card.

Expected copies are not set by rarity alone. They come from each printing's weight on the real MTGJSON print sheets, so two mythics need not match. Doubling Season sits on the Foundations rare and mythic sheet one slot heavier than a typical mythic, weight 8 of 1,120 instead of 7, so it appears about 14 percent more often per display. Muldrotha and Progenitus are the only other Foundations mythics on that heavier slot. That is why a card can out-contribute a more expensive card of the same rarity: the EV follows the actual sheet weights, not the sticker price.

Contribution Sample

How individual cards move the EV

These rows use the same snapshot basis as the article. A high price helps, but a lower-priced card can matter if it appears more often.

CardRarityPriceExpected / displayEV / display
Doubling SeasonFDNmythic$32.480.349$11.34
Bloodthirsty ConquerorFDNmythic$36.200.305$11.06
Hare ApparentFDNcommon$2.633.457$9.09
Twinflame TyrantFDNmythic$26.510.305$8.10
Mossborn HydraFDNrare$12.760.611$7.80
Sire of Seven DeathsFDNmythic$17.110.305$5.23

Expected copies and EV are per 36-pack Play Booster Display, not per case. Contribution rows are examples from the top-priced pull set, sorted by contribution.

Why two calculators disagree on the same box

Most of the gap between EV calculators is not a factual dispute. It is a choice about how you sell. The same Foundations box is worth very different amounts depending on whether you dump everything to a buylist, sell the meaningful cards yourself, or something in between. Here is our own number at each of those exits.

How you sell

The same box at three different exits

Vendor floor, land-adjusted EV, and full EV for the same Foundations box, at different exit assumptions.

Vendor floor
1.14x
Dump every card to a buylist at floor prices.
Land-adjusted EV
1.83x
Self-list cards, excluding the low-value land price mirage.
Full EV
1.93x
Self-list every priced card at retail market.

A calculator that prices cards at buylist lands near the vendor floor. One that prices self-listed retail lands near full EV. Same cards, different exit. We show all three so the assumption behind the number is visible.

Where the prices come from

Price Coverage

Where the prices come from

An EV number is only as good as its prices. This snapshot priced 803 of 1,042 pullable printings (77.1%). The 239 unpriced printings are low-value cards counted at zero, so the EV is conservative on coverage, not inflated. Every priced card uses the SpellBook production market price for its exact printing and finish, as of 2026-06-25. The downloadable card list below plus the per-card EV math in the contribution section let you re-add the number by hand.

Priced printings
803 of 1,042
pullable card types
Coverage
77.1%
unpriced cards counted at zero
Prices as of
2026-06-25
SpellBook production market

Part 2: how the EV appeared in real life

The second question is whether the model resembles a real opening. This cohort used every public Foundations card row from the implied-box inventory, excluding precon-open rows that were not Play Booster output. Read it honestly: only 97 of 5,847 cards have sold, only 78 of those have matched sale-disposition proceeds, and the remaining 5,746 live cards are valued at current market. So this is mostly a mark to market, not realized cash. The realized portion is broken out first.

Realized vs Remaining

Most of the result is still inventory, not cash

Only 97 of 5,847 cards have sold, and 78 have matched sale-disposition proceeds. Matched realized cash is 0.25x cost so far. The remaining live inventory plus unmatched sold-card fallback is valued at current market, which is 88.3% of the result.

Realized per box
$31.33
0.25x cost
Remaining per box
$236.74
1.86x cost
Cards sold
97 of 5,847
78 matched to sale proceeds
Remaining multiple
1.86x
88.3% of value still at market

Evidence Snapshot

The backtest landed close to full EV and above market by a wide margin

Implied boxes opened
11.60
5,847 priced card rows
Paid per box
$127.49
average acquisition cost
Actual result per box
$268.07
109.1% of full EV
Actual multiple
2.10x
on implied-box cost
Pre-fee profit
$1630.78
realized plus market value

The clean comparison

The box cost was $127.49. The live market price was $155.17. SpellBook Finance full EV was $245.76. The actual card result was $268.07 per implied box opened.

That strong cost multiple is partly acquisition edge. The boxes averaged 17.8% below the $155.17 market price on 2026-06-25, because the buy came from hunting the EV rankings instead of paying whatever a random sealed listing asked. If every opened box is marked at that market price, full EV is still $245.76 per box, or 1.58x market. The observed card result is $268.07 per box, or 1.73x market.

Per-box validation

Expected 1.93x on cost, actual 2.10x

The actual card result is above full EV, above land-adjusted EV, and far above the sealed market price.

Full EV assumes self-listing cards at retail market prices. Land-adjusted EV removes the low-end land price mirage. Vendor floor is the dump-to-buylist floor, not the self-listing target.

MetricValue
Average paid price$127.49
Market price$155.17
Full EV$245.76
Land-adjusted EV$233.04
Actual result$268.07
Expected EV multiple vs cost1.93x
Actual value multiple vs cost2.10x
Actual value multiple vs market1.73x
Market basis date2026-06-25
Full EV on market basis$2850.82 total, 1.58x

Selling below market still leaves margin

A fair objection is that market value is not cash. So we also modeled non-realized cards at 96% of market and then applied marketplace fees. Under the conservative version, the fee hits every dollar, including already-realized sales. At a 15% fee rate, the cohort still shows $1070.97 profit, 42% net margin, and 72.4% ROI on implied-box cost.

Fee sensitivity

Normal marketplace fees do not erase the profit

This conservative view values non-realized cards at 96% of market, then applies the fee rate to the whole gross result.

At 15% fees, conservative net profit is $1070.97, a 42% margin on net proceeds and a 72.4% return on implied-box cost.

MetricConservative outcome
0% fee$1520.93 profit, 50.7% margin
10% fee$1220.95 profit, 45.2% margin
15% fee$1070.97 profit, 42% margin
20% fee$920.98 profit, 38.4% margin
25% fee$770.99 profit, 34.3% margin
30% fee$621.00 profit, 29.6% margin

Variance Context

One box is noisy. A larger opening starts converging.

The live Foundations box page shows the pack distribution and bankroll risk profile. This backtest sits in that context: the median pack is below the mean, the chase tail matters, and the result should be read as one cohort, not proof that every box wins.

Median pack
$4.45
single-pack distribution
Mean pack
$6.85
full EV basis
Chase, 95th
$19.69
upper tail marker
Break-even
51.7%
packs pay for themselves
Packs to profit
29
about 1 box

n0 Calculation

Being under EV is not the same thing as failing the model

N0 estimates how many packs you need before the edge is large enough to overwhelm normal variance at roughly 97.5% one-sided confidence. Formula: (2 x pack standard deviation / edge per pack)^2.

BasisN0
Full EV vs market pack priceEdge $2.52 per pack at $4.31 cost29 packs
Full EV vs your paid pack costEdge $3.29 per pack at $3.54 cost17 packs
Land-adjusted EV vs market pack priceEdge $2.16 per pack at $4.31 cost40 packs
Land-adjusted EV vs your paid pack costEdge $2.93 per pack at $3.54 cost21 packs

Your implied-box cohort is about 418 packs. That is well past the n0 threshold on your cost basis, so the observed result being profitable and above full EV is favorable variance, not a promise that every box wins.

Stress test

If the true EV were lower, how lucky did we get?

Pick a true EV multiple a skeptic might claim, and a sample size. The curve is every result a cohort that size would produce at that true EV. The shaded tail is the chance of landing as high as our cohort, or higher.

Assume the true EV is1.20x

A rival calculator put Foundations near 1.2x. We model 1.58x.

Boxes opened9

Our real cohort was 11.6 boxes. Drag up to watch certainty grow.

If the true EV were 1.20x, a cohort of 9 boxes landing as high as ours, or higher, happens <0.01% of the time (~1 in 1,000,000+).

Hard to call luck

Our cohort: 1.73x market over 11.6 boxes (95% CI 1.581.88x). Our modeled EV: 1.58x.

Sampling only, valued at our prices. Only $31.33 per box is realized cash from 75 sold cards; the rest is remaining inventory at market, so this tests luck given our prices, not whether the prices are right. Real box variance and price error would widen the tail.

Audit File

Download the card-level Foundations CSV

Public artifact with card name, set, collector number, finish, condition, public bucket, quantity, market price, and market value. It excludes internal inventory IDs and account identifiers.

Download CSV

Backtest data method

We used the production Foundations inventory cohort: every card row with set code FDN, plus Special Guests collector numbers 74 to 83, excluding 72 precon-open rows because those were not Play Booster Display output. Each row was priced against the latest production card price for its finish. Matched sold rows were counted as realized sales, sold rows without matched sale-disposition proceeds were valued at current market, unsold rows were counted as remaining card value, and lost rows were surfaced separately.

The implied boxes opened count is derived from card rows divided by a Play Booster Display footprint: 36 packs times 14 playable cards, or 504 cards per display. The owner has 13 Foundations boxes, but not all are opened, so the card-count-implied 11.60 boxes is the right denominator for this backtest.

EV values come from the live Foundations Play Booster Display row on SpellBook Finance: full EV, land-adjusted EV, and vendor-floor EV. The chart above links the result to market price and actual cost because those answer different questions.

What this proves, and what it does not

It proves that this real Foundations opening landed close to the published full EV and nearly on top of land-adjusted EV, while remaining profitable after ordinary selling friction. It does not prove every box wins. Variance still exists, stale card prices can move, and listed inventory is not cash until it sells.

The useful conclusion is narrower and stronger: the EV estimate was not a hand-wavy number. It was close enough to audit against a real card list, and the published assumptions are visible enough for a skeptical reader to inspect.

Most of the result is unrealized. Only 97 of 5,847 cards have sold, and only 78 have matched sale-disposition proceeds; the rest is valued at current market using the same prices that feed the EV, so the close match is partly expected. Realized cash so far is 0.25x cost. The honest claim is narrow: the modeled EV is auditable, conservative on coverage, and consistent with how this cohort is selling, not a promise of cash in hand.

If the math made you want cardboard instead of caveats, the SpellBook Shopify store is over here. No variance proof required at checkout.

Related pages

Frequently Asked Questions

How does SpellBook Finance calculate Foundations Play Booster EV?

SpellBook Finance starts with Wizards' published Foundations Play Booster odds, uses MTGJSON's booster config weights and card sheet weights, prices each exact pullable printing, then sums expected copies per 36-pack display times market price across the priced card pool.

Did Foundations Play Booster EV match the real opening result?

It came in above the model. SpellBook Finance full EV was $245.76 per box. The real Foundations cohort produced $268.07 per implied box opened from matched sale proceeds plus remaining card value, which is 109.08% of full EV and 115.03% of land-adjusted EV.

Was the Foundations opening profitable?

Yes on the implied-box cohort. The average paid price was $127.49 per Play Booster Display. The backtest result was $268.07 per implied box opened before fees, or 2.10x cost. Even with non-realized cards valued at 96% of market and a conservative 15% fee drag on the full gross result, profit stays positive at $1,070.97.

How are unsold cards counted in the EV backtest?

Unsold cards are counted at current market value because they are still part of what the boxes produced. The backtest separates realized sales from remaining card value, then models selling friction separately in the fee section.

Why compare against market price as well as cost?

EV divided by market price answers whether a buyer at market should expect positive value. EV divided by actual cost answers whether this specific acquisition was attractive. For this cohort, full EV was 1.58x market on 2026-06-25 and 1.93x the actual paid price; the real result was 1.73x market and 2.10x actual cost. The paid basis was lower because the box was selected from the EV rankings instead of bought as a random market box.

What does n0 mean for this backtest?

N0 is a sample-size estimate. It asks how many packs are needed before the positive edge is large enough to overcome normal pack variance at roughly 97.5% one-sided confidence. Foundations full EV has an n0 of 29 packs at market price and 17 packs at this cohort's paid cost.

Can I audit the card list?

Yes. The page includes a downloadable CSV with every public Foundations card row used in the backtest, including card name, set, collector number, finish, condition, public bucket, quantity, market price, and market value. It excludes internal item IDs and account identifiers.

Does this prove every Foundations box is profitable?

No. This is one real opening cohort, not a guarantee. The Foundations box page still shows a noisy pack distribution where the median pack is below the mean and the chase tail matters. The result validates that the EV estimate was close for this cohort, not that variance disappears.

Why is SpellBook's EV higher than another calculator?

Usually because the other calculator assumes a different exit. Dumping every card to a buylist values this Foundations box near 1.14x cost; self-listing the meaningful cards at market values it near 1.93x. Both can be correct. SpellBook shows full EV, land-adjusted EV, and vendor-floor EV so the assumption behind the number is visible.

How much of the backtest result is realized cash?

About 12%. Of the $268.07 per implied box opened, $31.33 is matched sale proceeds from 78 sale-disposition rows and $236.74 is remaining inventory plus unmatched sold-card fallback valued at current market. The page breaks out realized cash from remaining inventory so the result is not read as cash in hand.