Polymarket trading figures are being ‘double-counted ’: Paradigm

cointelegraphPublished on 2025-12-09Last updated on 2025-12-09

Abstract

According to a Paradigm researcher, reported trading activity and volume on the prediction market platform Polymarket have been significantly inflated due to a data bug causing double-counting. The issue stems from Polymarket's complex onchain data, which emits redundant "OrderFilled" events for both makers and takers in a single trade. Major dashboards, including DefiLlama and Dune Analytics, mistakenly counted these as separate trades. This error impacts both notional and cashflow volume metrics. The discovery raises questions about Polymarket's recently reported success, including a $9 billion valuation from ICE based on potentially overstated volume figures. The researcher calls for more consistent and transparent reporting standards as prediction markets mature.

Some of the reported trading activity and volume of prediction market platform Polymarket may be significantly higher than actual reality due to a “data bug,” according to a researcher at Paradigm.

“It turns out almost every major dashboard has been double-counting Polymarket volume not related to wash trading,” said Storm, a researcher at the venture capital firm.

Storm explained that this was because “Polymarket’s onchain data contains redundant representations of each trade.”

“Polymarket’s onchain data is quite complex, and this has led to widespread adoption of flawed accounting methods.”

When trades occur on Polymarket, the system emits multiple “OrderFilled” events: one set for makers, who have existing orders, and another for takers, who execute the trade.

These events describe the same trade from different perspectives, not separate trades. However, many major dashboards have been combining them, counting the same volume twice.

Polymarket has been seen as a rare crypto success recently, as spot and derivatives markets have been in turmoil. The discovery that its headline metric may be incorrect across many dashboards could dent some of its perceived success.

Polymarket’s complex blockchain data

The researcher went on to explain that the accounting bug “inflates both types of volume metrics commonly used for prediction markets, notional volume and cashflow volume.”

“Polymarket’s data has been notoriously confusing for crypto data analysts ... the data has too many layers of interacting complexity to untangle using just a block explorer.”

Related: Polymarket plans to use in-house market maker to trade against users: Report

This complexity arises because Polymarket trades can be simple swaps or they can be “splits” and “merges” where both parties exchange cash for opposing positions.

The smart contracts emit redundant events for tracking purposes, and standard blockchain explorers don’t make this distinction clear, the researcher stated.

Cointelegraph contacted Polymarket for comment, but did not receive an immediate response.

Polymarket volumes using different metrics. Source: Paradigm

Polymarket is valued at $9 billion

The Intercontinental Exchange (ICE) valued the prediction platform at $9 billion this week, according to reports, citing $25 billion in trading volume, which could now be in question.

In September, it was reported that Polymarket was preparing for a US launch at a $10 billion valuation. In October, Bloomberg reported that it was looking to raise funds at a valuation between $12 billion and $15 billion.

Meanwhile, Dune Analytics reported that the platform achieved a monthly record of $3.7 billion in trading volume in November, but this may be double the actual figure if Paradigm’s research is correct.

“DefiLlama, Allium, Blockworks and many Dune dashboards were double-counting,” said the researcher.

Prediction markets are rapidly evolving into a critical financial sector, “and as the category matures, the industry should converge on consistent, transparent, and objective reporting standards,” the researcher concluded.

Magazine: XRP’s ‘now or never’ moment, Kalshi taps Solana: Hodler’s Digest

Related Questions

QWhat is the main issue with Polymarket's trading figures as reported by Paradigm?

AThe main issue is that many major dashboards have been double-counting Polymarket's trading volume due to a data bug, where redundant 'OrderFilled' events for the same trade are incorrectly summed.

QWhy does Polymarket's onchain data cause this double-counting problem?

APolymarket's onchain data is complex and emits multiple 'OrderFilled' events for a single trade—one set for makers and another for takers—which describe the same trade from different perspectives but are often counted as separate transactions.

QWhich specific metrics are inflated by this accounting bug?

AThe bug inflates both notional volume and cashflow volume, which are the two common types of volume metrics used for prediction markets.

QWhat potential impact could this discovery have on Polymarket's perceived success and valuation?

AThe discovery could dent Polymarket's perceived success, as its reported trading volume—which was cited in its $9 billion valuation by ICE and previous fundraisers—may be significantly overstated, potentially raising questions about its true market activity.

QWhich data platforms were mentioned as double-counting Polymarket volume?

ADefiLlama, Allium, Blockworks, and many Dune dashboards were specifically mentioned as platforms that were double-counting the volume.

Related Reads

72-Hour Countdown: Can the CLARITY Act Pass 'Miracleously' Before the Senate Recess?

"CLARITY Act Faces 72-Hour Deadline as Senate Recess Looms The U.S. Senate has released its schedule for the week, omitting the crucial CLARITY Act and instead prioritizing another resolution for a procedural vote. With the Senate set to recess on August 7th, the bill now has only about 72 hours to advance. Senate procedural hurdles are steep. First, a cloture petition requires signatures from 16 Senators. Second, a vote requires 60 votes, meaning the Republican's 53 votes need at least 7 Democratic supporters—a key sticking point that has stalled the bill for two months. If passed, a further 30 hours of debate is required before a vote to proceed to consideration. If 16 signatures are not secured by Wednesday, the bill won't even face a vote. Even if filed Wednesday, the earliest vote would be Friday, leaving no time for actual consideration before recess. The major divide remains ethical provisions. The draft bans certain senior officials from issuing or sponsoring digital assets until 2029, but Democrats argue enforcement loopholes are too large, failing to constrain existing holdings and family arrangements. The White House has not formally responded to the revised draft. The Trump family's substantial crypto profits have further eroded Democratic trust. Stablecoin rewards remain contentious. Banks liken them to deposit interest, fearing capital flight, while crypto firms see them as anti-competitive protection for banks. A current compromise bans passive interest but allows rewards for trading, staking, and platform activity. Polymarket data shows the bill's probability of passing by 2026 has fallen to 31%, down 7 points in a week. Betting volume is around $3.7 million. Analyst Bernstein warns failure to advance the bill could trigger a 'bad news' sell-off, pressuring Bitcoin and crypto valuations. Industry advocates, including Grayscale and Treasury Secretary (presumably Yellen, though 'Besant' appears in text), have urged swift action with thousands of contacts to Congress, but progress remains slow. If missed this week, the bill delays until September, where a busier schedule and approaching midterms complicate passage. Democrats suggest a procedural vote this week could keep hope alive for September, but that hope is fading hourly. Market sentiment appears resigned to delay, though a surprise passage could trigger a significant positive reaction. The bill's arduous journey underscores its potential impact on the industry."

marsbitJust now

72-Hour Countdown: Can the CLARITY Act Pass 'Miracleously' Before the Senate Recess?

marsbitJust now

George Santos Settles Dispute with Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) Over Trading on His Own Kalshi Market

Former U.S. Representative George Santos has settled with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) over allegations he manipulated a futures contract on the Kalshi prediction market related to his potential attendance at a presidential State of the Union address. According to a July 31 order, Santos must repay $17,569.98, pay a $17,500 civil penalty, and is barred from trading on any CFTC-registered exchange for three years. The CFTC found that Santos made misleading public statements about his plans to attend the event while trading on the outcome. He first built a profitable position betting he would attend, then reversed course and profited by betting against his own attendance after travel disruptions. Santos earned profits totaling over $17,000 from these trades. Santos agreed to the settlement without admitting to the findings. His attorney stated Santos initially intended to attend but changed plans due to winter weather, denying any intent to mislead traders or manipulate the market. Kalshi detected the suspicious activity, froze his account, and provided evidence to the CFTC. The exchange is considering further actions and potential restitution for affected traders. While Kalshi also referred the matter to the Justice Department, a spokesperson has denied an investigation exists. The CFTC settlement remains the only confirmed federal action regarding these trades.

cryptonews.ru6m ago

George Santos Settles Dispute with Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) Over Trading on His Own Kalshi Market

cryptonews.ru6m ago

Trading

Spot
活动图片