- Polymarket identified a French trader responsible for $28 million in pro-Trump bets, significantly influencing the platform’s U.S. presidential election market odds.
- Despite the large-scale trades, Polymarket’s investigation found no evidence of market manipulation, confirming that the trader’s actions were based on personal conviction.
- The trades have sparked criticism of political betting markets, with activist group Better Markets urging tighter regulations, citing concerns over election integrity and potential harm to investors.
Polymarket has identified a French national as the trader behind multiple accounts that have been placing substantial pro-Trump bets on the platform’s U.S. presidential election market.
The accounts—Fredi9999, PrincessCaro, Theo4, and Michie—have collectively wagered approximately $45 million, with $28 million dedicated to the presidential market alone. This significant volume of trading has driven the market odds of Trump’s victory to over 63%, notably higher than on other platforms like Kalshi and PredictIt.
Polymarket’s response
The massive volume of these trades has raised questions about the trader’s motive. However, Polymarket has stated that this trader’s actions are driven by personal conviction rather than any attempt to manipulate prices.
A Polymarket spokesperson confirmed that the individual has “extensive trading experience and a financial services background,” concluding that the trader’s activity was legitimate and that no manipulation was occurring.
“Based on the investigation, we understand that this individual is taking a directional position based on personal views of the election. Our investigation to date has not identified any information to suggest that this user manipulated, or attempted to manipulate, the market,” said the spokesperson.
The trader has also agreed not to open additional accounts without prior notice.
No evidence of market manipulation
Despite the large-scale trades shifting the odds in Trump’s favor, the evidence does not suggest intentional market manipulation.
Bloomberg Opinion columnist Matt Levine argued that the lack of any selling activity or “plans to sell” by the trader weakens the case for manipulation. “This looks like someone with a lot of money who thinks Trump will win, not someone trying to push up the price of Trump contracts,” Levine wrote.
The disruption caused by a single player has, however, given ammunition to critics of political betting markets. Better Markets, an activist group advocating for tighter financial regulations, pointed to Polymarket’s activity as a reason to halt Kalshi from offering similar election contracts.
Better Market’s 39-page brief, filed on Oct. 23, stated:
Allowing election gambling contracts to trade threatens to undermine election integrity, harm countless investors, and burden the CFTC with an inappropriate duty to police elections.
Better Markets urged the U.S. Court of Appeals to reverse a previous decision allowing Kalshi to operate election markets.
The market is price-sensitive
While some argue that the whale’s trades distorted the market, others contend that the price movement reflects available information rather than manipulation. As Aubrey Strobel of CoinDesk noted, “The market is never ‘wrong’; it just reflects the information available.”
When a whale places large bets, the market responds, adjusting the price accordingly. However, this does not imply an artificial price—other participants are still free to act based on their own evaluations of the odds.
“If you believe the Polymarket whale has a) meaningfully pushed up the price of the Trump contract, and b) is wrong, you can simply bet against him or her by going long on Harris,” writes Strobel.
Polymarket’s whale may have shifted prices on Polymarket, but he didn’t invalidate the legitimate trading that increased Trump’s electoral victory price. Kalshi’s price on a Trump electoral victory is only two cents lower than Polymarket’s. PredictIt’s Trump price is only four cents below Kalshi’s. While there’s a spread across top prediction markets, Trump’s price increases are legitimate.
