Skip to content
Preprint

Price Dislocations, News Citations, and Epistemic Leverage on Polymarket

Sep 2026 · 0 citations · 38 references
Physics Computer Science

Abstract

Prediction-market probabilities increasingly appear in news coverage, yet little is known about which market movements become news or how much trading money sits behind the numbers journalists quote. Unlike a poll, a market price can be moved by anyone willing to trade, so the cost of manufacturing a number that circulates as news bears directly on the information environment. We link 173.7 million signed Polymarket trades to news coverage from 2024-2025. From 6,990 articles mentioning prediction-market venues, an LLM-based, human-validated matcher extracts 1,582 sentences quoting market odds and attributes 918 to the specific market whose price they cite. We then detect 44,976 price dislocations, movements of at least five percentage points backed by concentrated one-sided trading, and ask whether a market is cited more often afterward. In the days after a dislocation, a market's citation rate is about 33% higher than its matched baseline (log citation-rate ratio $\tau_{\mathrm{cite}}=0.283$, permutation $p=0.001$), robust to binary and Poisson count outcomes. Yet move size is not the strongest predictor of citation: prominence dominates (standardized $\beta=0.610$ vs. $\beta=0.159$ for move size). Finally, we combine the dollar flow behind a given price change with observed citation rates into a metric we call epistemic leverage, the dollars needed to move a market five points and have the move cited. It stays near \$0.7-1.0 million across prominence quintiles, because cheaper-to-move markets are proportionally less likely to be cited. The implied threat model centers not on the long tail of cheaply moved markets but on the few prominent markets newsrooms treat as informational infrastructure, where a seven-figure price of influence sits within the budgets of actors with a large stake in the quoted number. We release aggregate event-study data and validation materials.

View source

Similar papers

Preprint Sep 2026

The Favorite-Longshot Bias in Prediction Markets: Evidence from Polymarket

The favorite--longshot bias (FLB) is one of the most persistent return patterns in betting markets, but its prevalence in modern prediction markets and its relation to recurrent longshot demand remain unclear. We study these questions in Polymarket, a large and increasingly important prediction market, using 588 millio...

Marcos Cardozo, José Ignacio Rivero-Wildemauwe · 1 citation
Oct 2026

“Buy the rumor, sell the fact”: political narratives and stock prices in an emerging equity market

This paper asks whether political narratives can generate large, temporary price movements in an emerging equity market, not fully explained by observable fundamentals and benchmark movements, using Taurus Armas S.A. (TASA4), Brazil's only listed firearms manufacturer, around the 2018 election, in which gun policy...

Thiago de Sousa Barros · 0 citations

Prediction Markets as Financial Markets: Herding or Wisdom of the Crowds

This dissertation examines prediction markets as emerging financial and informational venues, evaluating in two complementary studies whether their prices aggregate dispersed beliefs efficiently and whether they conform to established benchmarks of financial economics. Across more than two thousand binary contracts tra...

Markus P. A. Schneider · 0 citations
Preprint Oct 2026

Time-Varying Favorite-Longshot Bias in Polymarket Weather Markets

Prediction-market prices combine traders'judgments about future outcomes, but their errors may be concentrated in particular price ranges and change as settlement approaches. Prior cross-category evidence shows that Polymarket weather markets have larger pricing bias than other major categories, without separating low-...

Shou-Chen Qiu, Huai-Jun Qiu · 0 citations
#machine learning Preprint Oct 2026

Market Impact Estimation via Causal Foundation Models

When a trader executes a large order, the relevant question is not \emph{what will the price be?} but \emph{what would the price have been had I not traded?} Market impact is thus a causal quantity, yet classical models (Almgren--Chriss, propagators) regress price on flow, which is biased whenever informed flow moves p...

Dennis Thumm, Ying Chen · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.