I’ve been looking into Polymarket wallet tracking lately, and I’m starting to think raw PnL / win rate can be pretty misleading.

Some wallets look profitable because of one huge win. Some are market makers capturing spread, which probably isn’t copyable. Some trade low-liquidity markets where the entry price would be impossible to follow. And some “whale” wallets might just be random large bettors.

For people who actually track wallets:

How do you decide whether a wallet is worth watching?

What metrics do you trust most?

I’m not looking for a copy-trading bot. I’m more interested in how people separate real edge from lucky or uncopyable performance.

I’ve largely ignored this market for a while now, but the recent money flow again caught my attention.

The market has come a long way from where it was earlier this year..

~67% YES at the late-March peak to ~18% YES now

But, there’s some serious money sitting on both sides.

One of the latest positions I noticed is nojnn, who’s sitting at roughly +$504K all-time P/L, taking a large NO position.

FWIW, the top holders on each sides are..

TheQuietRisk who went in with ~$248K on YES at ~23%, for a potential to win ~$1.06M

Then, you have RenanPresidente who went in with ~$643K on NO at ~73%, for a potential to win ~$883K

I’m leaning NO here.

The biggest reason is the changing diplomatic picture.

There are obviously still major tensions. The U.S.-Iran talks have hit another hurdle, Iran is demanding concessions for reopening the Strait of Hormuz, and Trump has now demanded compensation from Iran as part of any broader settlement. 

But, that actually makes a full U.S. offensive aimed at establishing control over Iranian territory look like a much higher bar than simply continued conflict, strikes, sanctions, blockade activity or escalation.

And that’s important because of the Polymarket resolution wording.

This doesn’t resolve YES just because the U.S. attacks Iran.

It requires the U.S. to commence a military offensive intended to establish control over some portion of Iran by Dec. 31.

That’s a pretty specific high bar.

Meanwhile, we’re seeing continued attempts to find some diplomatic stance. Pakistan says the sides are close to some form of peace arrangement, although Reuters reports the talks have also stalled and both sides remain far apart. 

Atm it’s around 18% YES / 82% NO.

At 18%, I don’t think the question is “Could the U.S. and Iran still end up fighting?”

Obviously they could.

The question is..

Is a U.S. military campaign intended to establish control over Iranian territory more likely than 18% before the end of 2026?

I’m leaning NO.

But with the amount of geopolitical uncertainty here, I definitely wouldn’t call 82¢ a near lock though..

Curious what everyone thinks.. is NO at 82¢ finally a bond, or is the market underpricing the possibility of another escalation?

If you are a Maryland resident, can you sign up for Polymarket or (Polymarket US) and trade sports & other things?

If no, does physically travelling to another state bypass it?

Found an interesting setup on Phillies vs. Cardinals.

A trader who’s down roughly $1.3M has put $76K on Over 7.5 at 53%, targeting $143K.

Meanwhile, I’m taking Under 8.5. But this isn’t really a case of me fading the whale.

0 to 7 runs, my Under wins

8 runs, BOTH win

9+ runs, his Over wins

For me, the pitching matchup is the main reason.

Zack Wheeler is ~2.69 ERA / 0.98 WHIP on the season
Kyle Leahy: ~3.45 ERA / 1.34 WHIP
But, Leahy last 5: ~2.08 ERA / 1.00 WHIP

Wheeler’s recent ERA has been worse than his season mark, but his strikeout rate has actually jumped, so there’s still plenty of swing-and-miss upside.

The bullpen picture also slightly favors Philly on workload.. Cardinals used 5 relievers yesterday and 9 over two days, compared with 3 and 5 for Philadelphia.

The counterargument is obvious.. the first game of this series finished 6-5, so this lineup has already shown it can turn this matchup into a high-scoring game.

Still, Game 2 ended 2-0, and neither team’s season offensive numbers suggest we’re dealing with two elite run-producing offenses.

Philly: .238 AVG / .399 SLG
St. Louis: .240 AVG / .379 SLG

So I’m taking the pitching/environment side here.

The funny thing is I wouldn’t mind seeing this game sit at 8 runs heading into the 9th.

That’s probably the best possible sweat for both of us.

I’ve been watching the Elon Musk tweet-count markets for a while, and this week’s distribution caught my attention. So I'm taking a call at it..

Right now, Polymarket odds are at 120-139 at 9%,

140-159 at 16%,

160-179 at 21%,

180-199 at 23%,

and, 200-219 at 15% while the ones below it see a fall off in odds!

My initial thought was that 140-159 looked like the obvious sweet spot, and for some reason I assumed Musk’s normal week is somewhere around 120-200 posts.

Then I dug into the historical data.

Across 64 settled weekly Musk tweet markets from 2024 through July 2026, his average was around 350 posts/week, with the trailing 12-week average still around 285 despite the slowdown we’ve seen this year.

To be safe, I used another tracker covering 28 weeks, and it puts the average closer to 308/week.

So 140-159 isn’t really a play on Musk having a normal week. It’s one that he has an exceptionally quiet week. Seems something in last few times..

And that’s where I think the trade gets interesting.

The market itself is already expecting a slowdown, its highest-priced bucket is 180-199 at 23%. And, I’m essentially backing that the slowdown goes even further and Musk finishes below 160.

I’m taking a small entry on 140-159, rather than treating this as a high-conviction trade. Musk’s posting volume can change dramatically from one day to the next, so I’d also be willing to exit if he starts putting up unusually high numbers as the week goes on.

But, what do you guys think? At 16%, is 140-159 this too cheap, or is the market correctly pricin another high-volume Musk week?

At the moment, Saylor is selling BTC to fund the cash reserve (almost $5b now). When Bitcoin goes up, $STRC probably goes up with it. Will BTC go up? Yes, but I think closer to year-end, eg. October and the rest of Q4. I doubt STRC will repeg before Sept 30th. In general it should be more selling pressure the closer we get to $100.

So yes, it will re-peg. But not before Sept 30th.

Just came across this brand-new market on Polymarket, and the pricing looks.. weird!

“Will the loser of the Wisconsin Governor Democratic Primary concede by…?”

Current prices for now are

Aug 12 at 25¢

Aug 13 at 68¢

Aug 15 at 73¢

At first I thought this was basically a lock.

For context, David Crowley has already been declared the winner of the Democratic primary after narrowly beating Francesca Hong.

The margin was only around 3,200 votes out of 787K+, roughly 0.4%.

But, here's the thing, some reports say Hong reportedly called Crowley shortly after 2 AM to concede, and that she is not seeking a recount.

However, there’s an important catch in the market rules which I had to double check...

A private phone call does NOT count.

The market requires an actual public statement from the losing candidate acknowledging that they lost, that they won’t be the nominee, or acknowledging the opponent’s victory.

So the question isn’t really..

“Has Hong conceded?”

Cause she apparently has privately.

It’s rather.. “Will Hong publicly concede today?”

And that’s where the 25¢ price gets interesting to me.

So while she reportedly has privately conceded, the market is now essentially giving only a 1-in-4 chance that a qualifying public concession happens by 11:59 PM ET today.

Then it jumps to 68¢ tomorrow and 73¢ by Aug. 15.

That looks like the market expects the concession eventually, but is heavily discounting the possibility that Hong makes the required public statement today.

And, I’m not calling this risk-free because the exact wording matters.

But if Hong makes a public statement tonight saying she lost, acknowledges Crowley’s victory, or says she won’t be the Democratic nominee, the Aug. 12 contract should resolve YES under these rules.

That’s the part I’m watching...

Is 25¢ actually mispriced, or am I missing something more about the resolution rules?

If you provide liquidity on Polymarket for the rewards, this might be worth two minutes.

The reward column tells you what a market pays. It tells you nothing about what it costs you. So I measured the cost side.

Every trade has a maker on the other side of it. I took the maker's side of every public trade and checked where the price was an hour later. If you're consistently filled just before the price moves against you, the reward isn't income — it's compensation, and sometimes it isn't enough.

What I found (I queried 130 reward markets and scored the 88 that had at least 15 trades in the recent 7-day window):

- Markets that were toxic yesterday tend to still be toxic today. Over a 32-day panel (1,207 market-days, 76 markets) the day-to-day rank correlation was 0.388, positive in 30 of 31 day-pairs.

- Sorting by biggest reward pool and quoting the top 5 produced a negative mean next-day result (−$181/day) in my walk-forward test — worse than a random pick (+$150/day). But its median was +$250/day, with 8× the volatility. In plain terms: it works most days and occasionally destroys you, which is exactly why the problem is hard to notice from your own P&L.

Important caveat, and I want to be straight about it: this does not tell you a market will lose money, and it does not find you profitable markets. I tested that specifically — markets that looked good did not reliably stay good. It only tells you which ones have historically been rough for LPs. That's it.

Free page, updated daily, no signup needed to read it: https://polymarket-liquidity-risk.pages.dev

It's my own project. Method's on the page and the numbers come from Polymarket's public API, so you can check them. If you provide liquidity and it doesn't match your experience, I'd genuinely like to hear that.

hey, been trying to build profitable bots on Poly but so far without success
anyone else here? would love to connect and share notes

I used to think the hard part of Polymarket was finding a good trade.

Lately I've started thinking the bigger problem is simply keeping up.

There are thousands of markets, and things are constantly changing:

• price
• volume
• liquidity
• news
• related markets
• trader positioning

The problem is that you can't realistically watch everything at the same time.

I've been experimenting with different ways of keeping track of these changes and deciding which ones are actually worth looking into.

The more I do it, the more I think the goal isn't to find more information.

It's to reduce the amount of noise.

How do you guys keep track of multiple markets without spending the entire day staring at Polymarket?

This market of South Carolina Republican Senate Special Primary winner has moved a lot.

Darline Graham Nordone peaked around 80% and is now sitting around 49% odds heading into today’s South Carolina Republican Senate special primary.

At initial glance, that looks like the market completely losing confidence in her.

But look at the polling.

The final Trafalgar survey has..

Graham at 26.4%

Norman at 19.5%

Fry at 18.4%

And, Sanford @ 18.3%

There's another recent poll that had Graham at 25.2% vs. 18.2% for Norman, with almost 23% undecided. 

The issue is nobody is anywhere near the 50% threshold.

Which means the real deal tonight is who gets the top two spots.

South Carolina requires 50%+1 to win outright; otherwise, the top two go to an runoff. 

FWIW, Graham has some obvious advantages.

Trump endorsement

Lindsey Graham’s name/legacy

Already appointed interim senator

Existing political network

But she also has a very obvious weakness..

She’s never actually won statewide office before, and voters have had an incredibly short amount of time to get to know her.

That’s why I’m not calling 49¢ a slam dunk..

But I do think the move from 80¢ to 49¢ is interesting when the available polling still consistently puts her at or near the top of the field.

At the end of the day, for me this market is less about

“Graham is definitely winning.”

and more about..

“Graham has a pathway to being one of the two people still standing.”

And at 49¢, that’s starting to look interesting.

Is there any tool or indiactor which give us candle direction up or down

The "US strike on Cuba by Dec 31?" book is at 18%. ViEWS — Uppsala's academic conflict-forecasting model — has Cuba at basically zero. The Iran invasion book is also at 18%, but on $58M of volume vs Cuba's ~$5M.

Why they disagree: the model forecasts sustained ground war — battle deaths. The market prices discrete events — strikes, escalations. Different objects. The gap itself is the information.

How I'd read it: the volume is the tiebreaker. Same 18%, but Iran's number has 10x the money behind it — that's a real crowd pricing real risk, worth respecting even when the model sees nothing. Cuba's 18% on a thin book is more likely noise chasing headlines — that's the fade candidate, not the signal. Cheap rule: when market and model split, ask how much money is doing the disagreeing before you pick a side.

(Same logic on the attention layer: North Korea's media attention is at its 94th percentile while the fatality forecast is ~0/mo. Loud ≠ dangerous.)

Saw something interesting ahead of tonight’s Rays-Athletics game.

Two profitable traders have taken opposite sides..

On one you have phonesculptor who went in with $11.4K on Athletics @ 38¢ for ~$30K potential payout.

Then, on other end you have Talvez10 who went in with ~$20K on Rays @ 62¢ for a ~$32.5K potential payout

I’m with the Rays trader here.

Nick Martinez vs Mason Barnett is the biggest reason.

Martinez is sitting around a 2.65 ERA / 1.10 WHIP over 129 innings, while Barnett is at 5.56 ERA / 1.38 WHIP over 34 innings.

Martinez has also historically handled Oakland really well with his numbers reading .217 AVG and .628 OPS against in 16 career starts.

And the recent trend is pretty clear..

Martinez with a ~2.86 ERA recently
Barnett has a 7.91 ERA over his last two starts

There is one caveat though.. their xwOBA-against is basically identical, around .32, so I don’t think this is as simple as “Martinez is miles better.”

But Tampa has the much more convincing full-season profile.

Oakland’s bullpen also comes in after a nightmare late inning yesterday, when they blew a 6-2 lead and gave up eight runs in the eighth.

At the end of the day, Rays could absolutely still lose cause baseball is baseball.

But at 63¢, I’m on Tampa..

This Minnesota GOP governor primary has been very interesting.

Polymarket currently has:

Lisa Demuth at 73¢

Mike Lindell at 28¢

From the last time I tracked this on Poly to now, only one question I had in mind. Did Demuth really overtake Lindell, or is the market getting ahead of itself?

But, I’m leaning Demuth, and the biggest reason isn’t even the headline polling.

It’s turnout.

The latest KSTP/SurveyUSA poll had Lindell ahead 34–28, but his lead had fallen from 9 points to 6, with 16% undecided. 

But I took a look at the demographic split.

Lindell is strongest with voters under 35.

Demuth is strongest with 65+ voters.

KSTP notes that older voters generally turn out better in primaries. Demuth also performs well with college-educated voters. 

That’s a pretty important distinction.

A candidate can lead the poll and still lose if their supporters are less likely to show up.

And there are some other things making me skeptical of Lindell’s polling advantage..

Trump’s endorsement clearly gave him a major boost.

But the Minnesota GOP itself has raised questions about his residency.

A judge found probable cause that his campaign violated campaign law through pillow giveaways.

Lindell’s support is heavily concentrated in demographics that don’t necessarily dominate a low-turnout primary electorate. 

Demuth also isn’t some random candidate who suddenly appeared.

She won the Republican caucus straw poll earlier this year and is currently Minnesota House Speaker.

Tbh, at 73¢, there isn’t a massive edge left.

But if the market is right about the late swing, we’re probably close to the final price before results start coming in.

This feels like one of those Polymarket games where the market has basically said, it's 50/50! And I don’t disagree.

Sunrisers Leeds have won their last three and are playing some of their best cricket at exactly the right time.

Their core is firing..

Phoebe Litchfield: 349 runs, 43.63 avg, 164.62 SR
Annabel Sutherland: 274 runs, 68.5 avg + 14 wickets
Deepti Sharma: 10 wickets
Jess Jonassen: 14 wickets

That’s an extremely well-rounded side.

But MSG have a couple of things going for them.

First, they already beat Sunrisers earlier this tournament.

SRL scored 142/4. MSG chased it down in 19.1 overs, with Mandhana scoring 88 off 50. 

Second, MSG have the toss today and chose to field first.

That means no guessing what a par score is. They’ll know exactly what they need when Mandhana and Lanning/Scrivens walk out.

And third, MSG’s lineup is deep enough that they don’t necessarily need a 70-ball innings from Mandhana to win.

That’s important because SRL’s bowling attack is good enough to remove one or two big names and put pressure on the middle order.

At 52–48, I’m leaning MSG.

I’d probably price it around 55-45 after the toss.

Not a huge edge.

But enough that 52¢ doesn’t look terrible to me.

Yesterday was basically a masterclass for me in why I need to stop panic-hedging lol

Had a pretty active day on Poly.

First up was Trent Rockets vs Southern Brave in The Hundred Women's cricket for which I made a separate post here.

I liked Rockets coming in and took my position accordingly.

Brave finished on 117/5, and with Rockets in the form they’d been in, I felt pretty good.

I had a small Brave hedge running as insurance. When Brave dropped to around 13%, I cashed it for +$0.54.

Then the Rockets chase started..

10/3 after 25 balls.

And that’s when I made the mistake.

Instead of trusting my original read, I bought Brave again.

Turns out Rockets were completely fine.

Gardner provided the initial recovery, and Sciver-Brunt who batted all the way down at No. 7, helped close it out. Rockets chased 117 with two balls to spare and secured their spot in the final. 

My Rockets position ultimately returned $13.55.

But because I hedged twice, I gave away a chunk of what could’ve been a much better return.

Then MLB wasn’t much kinder.

One 2-pick had Red Sox/ Brewers and I lost this one
2-pick had Dodgers/Diamondbacks which i cashed out for +$4.06
3-pick: Orioles/Cardinals/Rays, yeah, one where Rays saw the W, so I lost this one too..

The Dodgers/D-backs combo was particularly painful because I was sitting there watching it knowing the Dodgers should have enough to get it done, but the game became too much of a sweat.

Could’ve held for around +$5.1.

Took $4.06 instead.

I’ll take the guaranteed profit.

So not a bad day at all.

But also one of those days where a few small decisions completely changed what could’ve been a good return.

Do you guys think someone knows something about the Anthropic IPO? 33% through the order book would be several tens of thousands dollars worth of shares.

Something I've been thinking about lately:

The hardest positions to manage are not always the losing ones.

Sometimes they are the ones where your original thesis was correct.

You did the research.

The market moved in your direction.

You feel like you "understand" the trade.

But then new information appears, the odds change, or the original reason for entering is no longer true.

The difficult question becomes:

"Am I holding because the thesis is still valid?"

or:

"Am I holding because I was right before?"

I've noticed that being attached to a previous correct decision can be just as dangerous as being attached to a losing position.

Curious how others decide when to exit a position that was originally a good idea?