Judith Levine Urges Ban on Prediction Markets as 0.1% of Accounts Capture 75% of Profits
Updated
Updated · The Guardian · Nov 2
Judith Levine Urges Ban on Prediction Markets as 0.1% of Accounts Capture 75% of Profits
1 articles · Updated · The Guardian · Nov 2
Summary
Judith Levine argues election prediction markets should be banned, saying they distort democracy by turning politics into gambling and shaping voter expectations and behavior.
A London Business School-Yale working paper found roughly 3% of Polymarket accounts were persistently skilled, while a Wall Street Journal analysis said 0.1% captured three-quarters of profits.
Among 1.6 million wallets reviewed, casual traders mostly lost money; just 2,000 of at least 2.3 million accounts netted nearly $500 million, aided by data feeds costing up to $200,000 a year and algorithmic trading.
Levine says that concentration also makes markets vulnerable to manipulation and insider abuse, citing George Santos's $18,000 Kalshi trade and Polymarket probes into dozens of suspected midterm fraud cases.
Election-betting volume has surged in 2026, with estimates above $220 million and platform claims of $1.4 billion, even as Levine argues federal oversight is unlikely under a Trump administration friendly to crypto and prediction markets.