Over $600 Million in Polymarket Election Trades Took Place After Races Ended
Two Polymarket election markets on its offshore platform saw more than $600 million in trading, much of it on candidates who had already lost or were long shots. Researchers say the unusual activity may reflect wash trading, which can make a market appear busier than it is, raising questions about how the platform monitors markets that remain open after events are effectively decided.
In Ethiopia’s election market, more than $285 million was traded, including about $284 million between pairs of accounts repeatedly buying and selling with each other, according to an analysis cited in the article. Just $173,000 was wagered on incumbent Abiy Ahmed, who won 438 parliamentary seats, while more than $41 million was traded on his chief of staff, who did not become leader. In a Romanian election market, an academic algorithm flagged 99.6 per cent of volume as potentially wash trading during certain weeks; Polymarket said it investigated and blocked accounts involved in the Ethiopian activity, but the traders’ identities remain unknown.
- Election markets saw more than $600 million in trading.
- Most Ethiopian market volume involved losing candidates.
- Researchers say the patterns may indicate wash trading.
New here? Start with this
Polymarket is an online prediction market where people trade contracts linked to the outcome of events, including elections. The price of a contract can reflect what traders think is likely, while trading volume shows how much buying and selling has taken place.
In an election market, people can keep trading until the market closes, even after voting or counting has made the result clear. Repeated trades between connected accounts can inflate the recorded volume without showing broad interest; this is known as wash trading.
Polymarket operates an offshore platform, and its election markets can attract attention from researchers, traders and the wider public. How those markets are monitored matters because unusually high volume can affect how active or informative a market appears.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
The reported trading patterns warrant scrutiny because wash trading can make a market look more active and informative than it is, potentially misleading users who rely on its prices or volume. Keeping election markets open after results are effectively settled may create opportunities for this behaviour, so stronger monitoring and clearer rules could help protect trust in the platform.
The case against
Unusual volume and algorithmic flags do not by themselves establish that all the activity was deliberate wash trading or that market users were misled. Polymarket says it investigated the Ethiopian trades and blocked accounts, and leaving markets open may allow trading to continue while outcomes or settlement remain disputed; proportionate oversight should distinguish proven misconduct from suspicious patterns.