An alleged $400,000 insider bet by a Green Beret on a Venezuelan raid, initially thought to be an isolated incident, may be just the tip of the iceberg. The Anti-Corruption Data Collective, a nonprofit research organization, has analyzed over 435,000 Polymarket contracts and $54.4 billion in cumulative volume from January 2021 to mid-March 2026.

The findings indicate that low-probability bets on military and defense outcomes have success rates that are difficult to explain by skill or luck alone, with some cases reaching success rates of over 50%. This is significantly higher than the typical 14% success rate for longshot bets in political markets. The research suggests that markets related to government policies, such as military and defense, are more susceptible to information asymmetries, including insider trading or specialized knowledge.

In these markets, a small group of informed traders may consistently outperform others due to their access to confidential information. The study's findings are consistent with previous research, which found that roughly 3% of traders account for most price discovery on Polymarket, and that fewer than 1% of wallets capture about half of all gains. The report examines the June 2025 U.S.

strikes on Iran as a case study, where 19 longshot bets totaling $164,292 were placed in the hours leading up to the strike, resulting in profits of about $1.8 million for eight wallets. The pattern of well-timed bets on military and defense outcomes extends beyond this single event, with winning longshot bets outnumbering losing ones in five of the six two-hour windows before market resolution. The consistency of these patterns 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 calls for an evidence-informed debate about whether the public should be betting on these outcomes at all.