The 2026 Golden Globes are set to take place this Sunday, January 11, at 8 p.m. ET from the Beverly Hilton. Comedian Nikki Glaser will host and the ceremony will be broadcast live on CBS and Paramount+.
The Golden Globes are sort of the unofficial kickoff of awards season from a film perspective, as awards bettors are counting down the days until the top show, the Academy Awards, which are a little more than two months away on March 15.
The Globes, however, include both film and television awards, and with those two industries operating on different timelines for their yearly awards, it makes for an interesting situation from a betting perspective. TV bettors have previous ceremonies to base their decisions on, such as the 2025 Emmys, which took place in September, while the film industry's awards cycle is just getting starting.
Action Network awards betting analysts Collin Whitchurch (film) and Michael Crosson (TV) break down their betting picks on all the categories in which they show value below.
If you're interesting in betting on the Golden Globes, sportsbooks such as DraftKings, FanDuel, and bet365 list odds in states where betting on awards ceremonies are allowed. Additionally, predictions markets such as Kalshi and Polymarket allow trading in all 50 states, and odds and percentages from both sportsbooks and predictions markets will be cited below.
Let's get into our 2026 Golden Globes predictions, picks and best bets for Sunday night.
Golden Globes Predictions, Picks, Best Bets for Sunday, January 11
Film Categories
The Golden Globes are somewhat tricky from a betting perspective, since we have little data to go off of in terms of previous awards ceremonies. In terms of awards shows considered "major" within the industry, this is the first one.
It also has very little predictive nature in terms of predicting the Oscars or other future awards given the makeup of the voting body (the Hollywood Foreign Press Association votes on the Golden Globes), so I generally pay it little attention.
Still, if you're a film buff, enjoy awards shows, or are a bettor looking to get down a little action, this can be a fun time. Gold Derby is generally a great resource for betting on the Academy Awards. It has a myriad of experts and editors predict winners.
They also predict shows such as the Golden Globes, so we'll rely on them heavily in this analysis as we look to find betting value on some of the major categories. You can read my in-depth reviews of the below films and more at Wanna Watch.
Best Film – Comedy/Musical
If One Battle After Another were competing against Sinners and/or Hamnet, I might have a little bit more interest in this category.
But as things stand, the behemoth's lead in most awards markets makes this a pass for me. One Battle After Another is trading around 93%, while Gold Derby's experts and editors have this around 95%.
If you're interested in betting things that are around -1300, you can lock in a small profit here if you so choose. One Battle After Another is winning this thing.
Best Bet: Pass
Best Film – Drama
This category is more wide-open than our other Best Picture category, as it does not include what is currently the very strong Best Picture favorite at the Academy Awards, One Battle After Another.
Sinners was the strong favorite here for most of the fall, only to take a dip in favor of Hamnet after the latter's December release and the high praise it garnered.
I bought in on Hamnet at 34% on Kalshi only to see the odds swing in the other direction, and I'm now in an unenviable position where I need to decide whether to go all-in on Hamnet or throw some on Sinners in hoping to make a profit by wagering on both films.
Based on Gold Derby's experts and editors, there's still slight value on Hamnet at 23% or better, but there's plenty of value on Sinners at 55%, given that 67% of their experts and editors are predicting a Sinners win.
If you want to lock in profit, betting on both at variable prices can get you home, as the next three contenders — It Was Just an Accident, The Secret Agent, and Sentimental Value — are, while very good and deserving nominees, foreign films that have received less exposure to the voting body.
I'll be bold and make Hamnet my official bet for the purposes of this article, but I'll also be throwing down on Sinners as long as it stays below 60% on the predictions markets.
Best Bets: Sinners & Hamnet
Best Actress – Comedy/Musical
The Academy Awards Best Actress race is shaping up to be a doozy between Jessie Buckley (Hamnet) and Rose Byrne (If I Had Legs I'd Kick You), and the Golden Globes will give us no early indications as they compete in separate categories here.
That makes these races less interesting, but I was surprised to find that there's significant value on Byrne here, as she's trading in the mid-70% range.
This is likely due to the fact that Byrne's closest competitor is the immensely decorated award-show darling in Emma Stone (Bugonia), and while Stone is always a threat to take a trophy home whenever she's nominated, she's trending significantly behind Byrne here (and both Byrne and Buckley in Oscars markets).
I locked in Byrne at her current trading price of 76% this week. Experts and editors at Gold Derby have her at 88%.
It might not be fun to bet on a favorite of around -300, but value is value, and her true odds should be closer to -750. This is my favorite bet of the Golden Globes.
Best Bet: Rose Byrne (If I Had Legs I'd Kick You)
Best Actress – Drama
Again, Buckley stands alone here thanks to having no legitimate threat with Byrne competing in the other category.
Unlike Byrne, however, there's no value on Buckley, as she's trading at an appropriate price north of 90%.
If you have the option to parlay picks, a parlay of Byrne and Buckley would be a solid option, but as it stands now, there's no value on Buckley at this price. Gold Derby's experts and editors have her around 95% to win, and the only other actress above 1% is Renate Reinsve (Sentimental Value).
Best Bet: Pass
Best Actor – Drama
I keep citing the Oscars races here because they will begin to take shape after the Golden Globes (nominations are announced in less than two weeks), but the Best Actor race got a lot more interesting when the Screen Actors Guild announced their nominees this week (the newly-named Actor Awards) and Wagner Moura (The Secret Agent) was nowhere to be found.
The presumptive favorite is in the comedy/musical category, making this race more wide-open, and Moura is the favorite here over Michael B. Jordan (Sinners).
Unfortunately, the prices here are spot-on. Moura is trading around 72% and Jordan around 25%, and that's right in line with Gold Derby's experts and editors, who have them at 74 and 24%, respectively.
Jordan is the more interesting bet for obvious reasons, and given that Sinners was a box office sensation and The Secret Agent is a lesser known film in a non-English language (Portuguese), I would consider a bet on Jordan if you can get him below 20%.
Best Bet: Pass (bet Michael B. Jordan below 20%)
Best Actor – Comedy/Musical
This category features the two favorites for Best Actor at the Academy Awards in Timothée Chalamet (Marty Supreme) and Leonardo DiCaprio (One Battle After Another).
The latter's film is in a strong position to clean up in most categories in which it is nominated, but that's not the case here, as Chalamet is favored, and his lead is only growing.
Chalamet is almost like a young DiCaprio in that he's a critical darling, and of course it's not difficult to envision a young DiCaprio as he's been on the scene since he was a teenager.
DiCaprio received his first Oscar nomination at 20 years old in a supporting role for What's Eating Gilbert Grape, but didn't get his hands on a trophy until more than 20 years later when he won Best Actor for The Revenant in 2016.
Chalamet, who just turned 30, broke out with a supporting Oscar nomination in 2018 for Call Me By Your Name, and became a true Awards Season player last year, when many thought he'd win Best Actor for portraying Bob Dylan in A Complete Unknown, only for him to lose out to Adrien Brody for The Brutalist.
When Chalamet won at the Screen Actors Guild last year, he made it clear in his acceptance speech that being recognized by major awards voting bodies meant a lot to him, and he almost seemed competitive in being considered a great actor.
So, it's no surprise to see him continue to take difficult roles in prestige films like Marty Supreme, and he absolutely deserves all the accolades coming his way.
Chalamet is trading around the 80% range to take home this award, so there's actually slight value on DiCaprio, who is trading around 11% but is at 16% via Gold Derby's experts and editors.
I do wonder, though, if like Stone, there's a name-recognition boost for DiCaprio in the market. I don't see Chalamet losing this award, but while it's not bettable to me, I have no interest in betting on DiCaprio or the other long shot, Ethan Hawke (Blue Moon).
Best Bet: Pass
Best Supporting Actress
This is one of the few categories with no runaway favorite and where we can use Gold Derby's predictions to guide us, while also using our instincts.
Teyana Taylor (One Battle After Another) was the favorite in this category for most of the fall, but she was overtaken by Amy Madigan (Weapons) after the latter's win at the Critics Choice Awards last weekend.
This has boosted Madigan's price to right around 50%, whereas Taylor is around 30%.
The Critics Choice Awards and the HFPA have aligned in each of the last four years, so the switch makes sense, and Gold Derby's experts and editors similarly flipped their projections after last weekend and are in line with the market. Madigan is at 52% and Taylor at 34%.
Polymarket has Madigan at 48%, though, and I like that price. While Madigan is only the predicted winner 52% of the time at Gold Derby, their editors have her listed at 66%.
I'm not sure if the market has moved far enough, so I'll take a nibble at Madigan at this price. It's not uncommon for someone to enter awards season as a long shot, only to run away from their nominees in the lead-up to the Oscars.
Best Bet: Amy Madigan (Weapons) at 50% or better
Best Supporting Actor
This category is truly all over the place, and the only one where we don't have a single nominee trading over 40%.
Stellen Skarsgård (Sentimental Value) entered awards season as the presumptive favorite and remains so, but he was beat out by Jacob Elordi (Frankenstein) at the Critics Choice Awards, and then he wasn't even nominated at all for the Actor Awards.
These recent revelations have opened the door for other nominees, including Elordi and the two nominees from One Battle After Another: Benicio del Toro and Sean Penn.
What this boils down to are four veteran actors with previous awards and nominations in their back pockets against the newcomer, Elordi, who burst onto the scene with his role in the hit TV show, Euphoria, and has only seen his star grow from there.
Elordi is trading in the 18-20% range, but after the CCA, Gold Derby didn't budge much in its predictions, pegging Skarsgård at 58%, which implies immense value on the 74-year-old Swede. Elordi remains at just 10% by Gold Derby, while he's trading in the 18-20% range.
Del Toro and Penn make things interesting, too. This was seen as a two-horse race between del Toro and Skarsgård until Elordi's CCA win, and the history of nominees from the same movie (del Toro and Penn in this case) splitting votes works against either of them.
Thus, my instincts say the value lies on either Skarsgård or Elordi, and seeing as how you can lock in value by betting on both (with neither trading above 50%), that would be my approach in this category.
Best Bet: Split bets between Stellen Skarsgård (Sentimental Value) & Jacob Elordi (Frankenstein)
Television Categories
Best TV Drama
Not too long ago, I was on my soapbox preaching that everybody should fade Season 2 of Severance as a -225 favorite in the Drama category at the Emmys (70% implied probability).
It turns out, that part of my analysis was correct, but I just landed on the wrong type of underdog pick, as I believed there was more value in sprinkling on a long-shot like Andor at +2000, as opposed to taking the second show on the board at +250 (The Pitt, 28.5% implied probability).
Fortunately, I won’t be able to make that same mistake again at the Golden Globes — with The Pitt listed as a -425 favorite to win Best TV Drama, while every other show in the category is listed at +1000 or longer.
Similarly, though, I see no value in backing the favorite in this market at an 81% implied probability. It’s a subjective awards show with a totally different voting body than the Emmys, and The Pitt was considered a pretty steep underdog in this category not too long ago. But again, I do see value in sprinkling on your long-shot of choice.
Personally, I think the best chance of an upset here is Pluribus at +1300.
Pluribus is a bit of a wild-card because the Golden Globes will only be the second major awards show that it has qualified for — but I see this as a chance to potentially buy in early on a series that may very well turn out to be an awards juggernaut.
Regardless of where you stand in the Pluribus conversation, all that really matters is that Pluribus is the third show created and shepherded by Vince Gilligan (Breaking Bad, Better Call Saul) — and critics/awards voters adore this guy’s work.
Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul racked up a whopping 111 Emmy nominations over the course of their impressive runs, winning 16 of those nominations.
Make no mistake about it. Pluribus is not an extension of the Breaking Bad universe, and it strays far away from the comfort zone that allowed Gilligan to rack up so many nominations in the past.
However, similarly to Gilligan’s previous two projects, critics are loving Season 1 of Pluribus as well — currently boasting a 98% critics rating with 160 reviews on Rotten Tomatoes, 87/100 on Metacritic, 8.1/10 on IMDd.
Plus, awards voters already seem to be paying attention to Pluribus in general, with Rhea Seehorn taking Best Lead Actress at the Critics Choice Awards in its first major awards show appearance.
Prior to Emmys season, the Best TV Drama race was seemingly wide open, and that proved to be true with an underdog coming through with a win. Now, that same underdog (The Pitt) is listed at -425 to win the Golden Globe — which just feels wrong to me, despite the Emmys typically serving as a solid indicator for the Globes.
If you prefer the simpler mathematical route, you could also sprinkle on Severance at +1000, a show that was listed as an overwhelming favorite to win Best TV Drama at the Emmys just a few months ago (70%) — and performed well, winning eight of its 27 nominations, despite failing to take home the top prize.
The pendulum has swung too far toward The Pitt in prediction markets, and with Pluribus entering the mix, I believe it will only divide the voters in this category even more.
We just saw Severance fall to The Pitt at the Emmys, so I like the newfound potential upside we are getting with the new Gilligan-verse project in Pluribus. However, I certainly won’t be surprised if Severance wins the Globe either.
Best Bets: Severence and Pluribus
Best TV Comedy
The Studio pretty much ran the table in the comedy category at the Emmys, breaking records by winning 13 of its 23 nominations, and push comes to shove, I’m expecting no different at the Golden Globes.
Kalshi is giving the studio an 89% chance to win Best TV Comedy, and I think that's actually a pretty fair price. I would project it a little north of 90%.
However, nobody wants to bet on a -800 favorite, and I would never recommend it in a subjective market like this either. So, I’ll discuss some other ways to target the comedy categories instead.
Prior to the latest Emmys in which The Studio firmly planted its flag atop the totem pole, the comedy category was mostly a two-horse race between Hacks and The Bear; Hacks won last year, The Bear won the year before that.
Neither of the aforementioned shows are coming off their best seasons though, and I don’t expect The Globes to reward them with the top prize again, especially having never recognized The Studio before.
If the Globes decides it wants to break stride from the Emmys and recognize a different show, I think we’ll see it prop up one of the long-time favorites that’s never truly been given its due; either Abbott Elementary or Only Murders In The Building.
The Golden Globes has already shown its fondness for Abbott Elementary in the past, awarding the series Best TV Comedy back in 2022 — and it’s never won the top prize at the Emmys before.
Meanwhile, Only Murders In The Building has never won much of anything. However, this is an incredibly beloved show starring a pair of comedy legends in Steve Martin and Martin Short, a show that's been running for five seasons now – and it continues to get nominated in almost every major category each season, with hardly any hardware to show for it.
All things considered, we will almost certainly see The Studio win Best Comedy. However, there may still be some decent ways to attack the comedy category in other markets.
Best Bet: Pass
Best Lead Actor in a TV Comedy
My favorite way to target the comedy market is the Best Lead Actor category.
Prior to the debut of The Studio and his win at the latest Emmys, Seth Rogen had only been nominated for one acting Emmy (Pam & Tommy), and never won nor was ever truly considered a legit contender. And quite frankly, Rogen’s performance in The Studio isn't overly nuanced either. So, I think Rogen at 86% is a bit steep in this market.
Rogen basically just plays a version of the same type of character that he’s famous for playing in The Studio. The show never really gives him the chance to shine alone and reach the heights he’s capable of hitting as an actor dramatically nor comedically.
The strength of the Studio is in its writing and the brilliance of its concept and execution. Not necessarily its acting, which isn’t intended to be a knock on Rogen. The role just doesn’t really require a standout acting performance. He mostly plays the straight man surrounded by various eccentric personalities — and Rogen is just as charming and funny as ever in the role, it’s just not all that impressive from an awards standpoint.
Meanwhile, Jeremy Allen White has won the Golden Globe for Best Lead Actor in a TV Comedy for all three seasons of The Bear so far — and he’s listed at +2300 to make it 4-for-4 at this year’s show.
Do I think it’s going to happen? No, especially after White left them hanging and didn't show up to last year’s ceremony to claim his award. But given JAW’s track record at The Globes, plus Rogen’s somewhat lack of a track record, this is the comedy market where I see the most potential value.
The Bear is a great show, but it isn't very funny. It’s actually quite bleak and stressful. I would never vote for it to win Best Comedy. However, The Bear was basically engineered in a lab to win actors awards. The nature of the content makes it a perfect platform for its actors to show off their range in a semi-comedic setting.
As an overall product, The Bear is trending the wrong direction, and I’ll be the first person to tell you that this show doesn’t belong in the comedy category. However, because of how unique the performances are compared to the rest of the category, JAW’s chances of winning a fourth-straight Globe might be greater than people realize for a down-season of The Bear.
Best Bet: Jeremy Allen White (The Bear)
Best Limited Series
I am in no way shape or form qualified to make the case against Adolescence in the Limited Series category – and quite frankly, I don't really want to either.
However, with Kalshi projecting Adolescence at a 95% chance to take home the top prize and Stephen Graham north of 85% to win Best Lead Actor, there's still some value in sprinkling on a long-shot or two, just in case any voter fatigue starts to set in for the show that's already won eight Emmys.
Best Bet: Pass
Best Lead Actor in a Limited Series
This might be a little bit of recency bias, as The Beast In Me came out just two months ago, while Adolescence came out almost eight months prior to that — however, awards voters are susceptible to those same human emotions. So, I’m going to trust my gut and roll the dice on a pair of actors from the same series in Claire Danes and Matthew Rhys to win Best Lead Actor/Actress in a Limited Series.
Adolescence basically ran the table in the Limited Series category at the Emmys, and has continued to dominate at almost every show that it's qualified for — and while I am also quite fond of Adolescence as a whole, I do think it is consistently overpriced in one particular category, which is Lead Actor.
Stephen Graham won the Best Lead Actor Emmy for Adolescence, to go along with some other awards, but he’s not quite dominating like the show itself has over the course of its run, nor young Owen Cooper in the Supporting Actor category.
Graham’s performance in Adolescence is perfect, especially in episodes one and four. However, you could argue that he isn't even the lead actor in the short, four-episode series. And while the Globes will almost certainly award the show with Best Limited Series, Writing, Directing, etc., I’m not so sure we need to keep giving Graham acting awards for this role.
Any way you slice it, we will see Graham on stage accepting some type of award at the Globes, as he is also one of the show’s co-creators and lead writers. However, that’s also partly why I think we may see the Globes spread the wealth in the acting categories — and if they want to do it, they almost have to do it in the Lead Actor/Actress categories since all the supporting performances in Adolescence are so strong.
Personally, I wasn't a huge fan of Monster: The Ed Gein Story, and it sounds like I certainly wasn't alone in that camp, sporting a 41% critics score on Rotten Tomatoes and 28/100 on Metacritic. Evan Peters fared pretty well during awards season for Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story back in 2022, despite similarly lackluster critics reviews overall — however, I don’t see lightning striking twice for this franchise with Charlie Hunnam.
That brings me to Matthew Rhys, who was phenomenal in The Beast In Me, a show that’s success entirely rests on the shoulders of his performance, and he delivers in a big way.
Rhys constantly keeps the viewer guessing as to whether his character is truly insane or just a kooky, weird guy — showing off a nuanced range that slowly bubbles up, and when all is ultimately revealed, Rhys doesn’t hold back anything. He puts on quite the show. While the timing of release probably isn't right for him to win an Emmy for this role, it would be nice to see him win something for it.
Rhys’ performance in The Beast In Me is pound-for-pound the best in the category, despite it coming in a far inferior show than Adolescence. It’s a bit of a shot in the dark, given that he hasn’t won any hardware for this role yet. However, I’m going to bank on some Adolescence fatigue setting in deep into its awards campaign and try to capitalize on a performance that might be flying under the radar a little bit right now, caught in the middle of these two awards seasons.
Best Bet: Matthew Rhys (The Beast In Me)
Best Lead Actress in a Limited Series
On the actress side, Michelle Williams (Dying for Sex) was the clear cut favorite in this category not too long ago, hovering north of 62% at Kalshi as the calendar turned to 2026.
However, following Sarah Snook’s win for All Her Fault at the Critics Choice Awards, this market totally flipped in the days leading up to the Globes, with Snook now sitting at 62%, while Williams now sits at 28%, followed by Claire Danes at 7%.
Quite honestly, I didn't think All Her Fault was all that good, aside from an excellent pilot and a bonkers finale. Snook still gives a solid performance in it, certainly worthy of a nomination, but the market movement in this category is a huge overreaction to her win at Critics Choice. If anything, it just proves how wide-open this race is right now.
Snook, the famed Succession actress, didn't win an Emmy for Succession until its final season – and in the midst of a run for a show that dominated pretty much every category each season, the fact that it took voters so long to award her for her role in one of the true awards darlings of the last 10 years, makes me a bit skeptical of her chances of winning for future roles. Her body of work in Succession is lightyears better than the work she turned in for All Her Fault.
So, who is going to win? Michelle Williams is a great actress and a five-time Oscar nominee. I have no doubt that she is a legitimate threat to win this category at +340.
I’ll also take a shot on Claire Danes here at +1300.
Danes plays her performance in The Beast In Me pretty straight down the middle. She doesn't exactly set the screen on fire with her range and emotional flare like she does in Homeland.
However, Danes is in almost every single frame of the Beast In Me (aside from a flashback episode) a first-class “innings eater” if you will, and while Rhys is undeniably the MVP of the project, the show is mostly a two-hander between Rhys and Danes, and the show doesn't work without her steady performance and her chemistry with Rhys.
Best Bets: Claire Danes (The Beast In Me)
