The alleged $400,000 insider bet by a Green Beret on a Venezuelan raid initially seemed like an isolated incident. However, a new report suggests it might be just the tip of the iceberg.

The Anti-Corruption Data Collective, a nonprofit research organization, analyzed over 435,000 settled Polymarket contracts from January 2021 to mid-March 2026, with a cumulative volume of $54.4 billion. The analysis found that low-probability bets on military and defense outcomes have success rates that are difficult to explain by skill or luck alone.

Typically, such 'longshot' bets succeed around 14% of the time across political markets. In contrast, military-linked contracts have seen success rates exceeding 50% in some cases. The authors of the report noted that markets related to government policies, such as military and defense, are harder to predict using public information, making them more susceptible to information asymmetries, including insider trading or specialized knowledge.

This creates an environment where a small group of traders can consistently outperform others, not just by reacting faster, but by having access to more information. Polymarket has emphasized its market surveillance teams and cooperation with the Department of Justice on the Venezuela case, as trading on confidential knowledge is prohibited on the platform.

The report's findings contribute to a growing body of research pointing in the same direction. A working paper from London Business School and Yale found that approximately 3% of traders account for most price discovery on Polymarket.

Separate analysis from blockchain analytics firm Solidus Labs showed that profits are even more concentrated, with fewer than 1% of wallets capturing about half of all gains. The ACDC report examines the June 2025 U.S. strikes on Iran as a case study, where several date-specific contracts were listed on whether a strike would occur.

Despite the Pentagon's efforts to keep the operation secret, a small number of traders placed large, well-timed bets on the outcome, with eight wallets sharing about $1.8 million in profits. The pattern extends beyond this single event, with winning longshot bets outnumbering losing ones in five of the six two-hour windows before market resolution, contrary to what market prices imply.

While longshot bets can outperform due to other reasons, such as mispricing or shifts in public expectations, the consistency of the patterns, especially in markets tied to military decisions, suggests that some participants may be operating with information advantages that others do not have. The report recommends identity verification for bettors, conditional payouts on suspicious wagers, restrictions on markets whose outcomes are decided by small groups, and limits on how granular contracts can become.

Ultimately, the report concludes by calling for 'an evidence-informed debate about whether the public should be betting on these outcomes at all.'