PolyConsensus

3. Buying below smart money's entry

Does buying the consensus side cheaper than the holders paid beat buying it after the price moved their way?

nothing (some variants negative)Pre-registered on 2026-10-25best variant pooled +0.2 % a trade over 1,434 trades (chosen after the fact)

Definition

The volume-weighted entry price of the consensus side's holders (sum of shares x average price / sum of shares) minus the side's current price at the hour the consensus formed. Variants: 5+ points below the holders' entry, 10+ below, within 5, 5+ above.

Baseline for every comparison: the plain consensus on the same markets (5+ tracked holders, 60 %+ on one side, price 0.05–0.95, first signal, held to resolution), 1 ¢ half-spread plus Polymarket's taker fee; $1 a trade.

Mean return per trade, with 95 % intervals

One marker per window: circle = A (curated wallets, Mar–Apr 2026, clean), square = B (all tracked wallets, Oct 2026, provisional, drift ranges dropped), diamond = pooled. Variants with fewer than 30 trades in a window are left out of the chart; the table below has every number.

Every variant

Buying below smart money's entry: every pre-registered variant per window
VariantExpectedWindow AWindow BPooled A + BIS / OOS (pooled)vs its baseline (pooled)GuardVerdict
3a price >= 5 points below the holders' entry
entry filter, decided at the signal
better−14.7 % [−28.4, −0.9]
n = 450, hit 41 %, price 0.40
−15.4 % [−24.8, −7.2]
n = 460, hit 50 %, price 0.53
−15.1 % [−23.2, −6.7]
n = 910, hit 46 %, price 0.46
IS −20.8 % (514)
OOS −9.7 % (324)
−12.4 [−21.2, −3.9]
points vs the dropped trades, p = 0.9965
nonegative
3b price >= 10 points below the holders' entry
entry filter, decided at the signal
better−24.9 % [−41.1, −8.5]
n = 287, hit 33 %, price 0.32
−14.6 % [−28.4, +1.2]
n = 222, hit 43 %, price 0.44
−20.4 % [−30.7, −8.8]
n = 509, hit 37 %, price 0.37
IS −25.6 % (309)
OOS −14.0 % (164)
−17.3 [−28.1, −5.3]
points vs the dropped trades, p = 0.9935
nonegative
3c within 5 points of the holders' entry (control)
entry filter, decided at the signal
control−3.2 % [−7.8, +1.6]
n = 1,845, hit 62 %, price 0.61
−3.9 % [−7.1, −0.9]
n = 2,630, hit 64 %, price 0.63
−3.6 % [−6.3, −0.9]
n = 4,475, hit 63 %, price 0.62
IS −1.2 % (2,217)
OOS −5.5 % (1,948)
+2.1 [−2.6, +6.6]
points vs the dropped trades, p = 0.1833
nonothing
3d price >= 5 points above the holders' entry (control)
entry filter, decided at the signal
worse+1.5 % [−3.3, +6.3]
n = 768, hit 81 %, price 0.79
−1.2 % [−5.4, +3.1]
n = 666, hit 78 %, price 0.77
+0.2 % [−2.8, +3.3]
n = 1,434, hit 80 %, price 0.78
IS +4.6 % (851)
OOS −4.7 % (470)
+5.8 [+1.9, +10.0]
points vs the dropped trades, p = 0.0045
nonothing

What this data can and cannot show

Can: Whether the holders' cost basis carries information about the price, or whether a price that fell after they bought means they were wrong.

Cannot: The order book: the price is the last tracked fill (median error 0.5 c, p90 2.5-16 c), so small differences are noise; the 5-point bar is there for that reason.

Caveats that apply to every signal

  • Only tracked wallets' fills exist, from when the site started tracking them; the replay is closer to the chain than to what the site displayed (no Polymarket position overrides, merges missing May–Oct 2026).
  • Window B's fill times run early in parts of October 2026; the affected ranges are dropped and the rest is not proven clean. Its numbers are provisional until the repaired export is in.
  • Prices are the last tracked fill, not the order book (median error 0.5 ¢, p90 up to 16 ¢ on fast markets); entries happen on the hour (5-minute steps in play).
  • The windows are 7 and 3 weeks long; effects of a few points cannot pass a guard over 40 variants there. A failed guard is not evidence of no effect — it is the absence of evidence.
  • Nothing here is trading advice. Past replays, even clean ones, do not pay future trades.