Polymarket spokespersons have reportedly identified the individual responsible for $28 million in pro-Trump trading positions on their platform. The unnamed French citizen, who has a seasoned background in finance and trading, was found to be the owner of four separate accounts: Fredi9999, Theo4, PrincessCaro, and Michie. Polymarket representatives have stated that their investigation did not uncover any evidence of market manipulation. The trader intentionally spread their bets across smaller positions to avoid causing erratic movements in the market.
Polymarket also reached out to the individual in question, who explained that their positions were based on personal sentiment regarding the outcome of the 2024 United States presidential election. The company asserts that the election odds on their platform are consistent with those on competing platforms.
It is worth noting that other prediction markets have yielded similar results. In October, Polymarket’s betting odds for the presidential election began to heavily favor former President Donald Trump, which raised concerns about market manipulation. In response, Polymarket conducted an investigation to identify potential US users on their platform. However, Tarek Mansour, the founder of Kalshi, argued that the Polymarket odds were organic and reflected genuine market sentiment. Mansour presented data from Kalshi, an “American-only” platform, that supported Polymarket’s election odds, showing Trump with a significant lead over Vice President Kamala Harris.
The odds for the former president on Polymarket experienced a sharp rise in early October after several months of closely contested betting spreads between the two candidates. In the initial weeks of August, Vice President Harris held a clear lead over Trump, with a margin of up to 10%. However, this lead began to diminish in late August and early September, resulting in a close race between the two candidates.
Critics of Polymarket and similar prediction market services argue that these platforms are not as accurate as polls and that traders are making speculative bets without substantial evidence. On the other hand, supporters of these platforms contend that prediction markets serve as a public good and offer a more precise gauge of election sentiment compared to polls, thanks to the monetary incentives involved.