arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 2609.12878

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

Abstract

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 million trades by 2.48 million accounts. In observed transaction flows, purchases below 10 cents lose 19.3 cents per dollar, while purchases at or above 90 cents earn 0.83 cents. How contracts are grouped changes the result: longshots lose 6.3 cents per dollar when each contract is weighted equally but gain 4.1 cents when related contracts are first grouped by parent event; the two-sided pattern is robust in Crypto and Politics but surprisingly absent in Sports. The top decile of accounts with the strongest past tendency to buy longshots accounts for 26.6 percent of next-month low-price purchases, but earns similar returns to others. The top decile of accounts with the strongest past tendency to buy favorites accounts for 15.1 percent of next-month high-price purchases but earns less than others. These findings provide evidence of an aggregate FLB on Polymarket, but its magnitude depends on how contracts are grouped.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Marcos Cardozo, José Ignacio Rivero-Wildemauwe. 2026-09-11. The Favorite-Longshot Bias in Prediction Markets: Evidence from Polymarket. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.12878

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Access to Live AI Advice and Behavior Under Risk: An Incentivized Experiment

Generative AI has become an everyday advisor, and the systems people consult are live and interactive, not pre-scripted. We ask whether access to such a system changes behavior under risk. In an incentivized experiment (N = 158), participants made lottery choices with an optional decision aid presented as a conventional pre-written tool, a live one-shot AI, or a live interactive AI they could query, with information format held equivalent across conditions. Risk preferences are elicited via DOSE. We find no evidence that access to a live AI advisor changes risk aversion.

econ.GN

Bricks or Cash? Externalities of Housing Upgrading in High-density Cities

We estimate housing externalities in a high-density city, exploiting the staggered rollout of Singapore's nationwide Main Upgrading Programme for public housing. Controlling for nonrandom neighborhood exposure, we find that upgrading raises treated buildings' prices by 11.5% upon completion and neighboring buildings' resale prices by about 2% within 500 meters, decaying to zero beyond. A model with distance-decaying externalities shows that in dense settings spillovers justify the distortions of in-kind provision; this advantage diminishes and reverses at lower densities. Administrative data on over 2 million residents show that upgrading disproportionately retains older incumbents, suggesting age-specific amenities as an underexplored externality channel.

econ.GN

The Joneses Visit an Economics Lab

Existing literature offers persuasive evidence that individuals care about how their consumption compares to that of peers, and proposes a large variety of explanatory models. The present paper proposes a common framework for many of those models, and compares their ability to predict behavior in a laboratory experiment. We find evidence of Keeping up with the Joneses motivations but also find that conspicuous consumption is enhanced by Veblen motivations arising from peers' ability to observe one's own choice. Among the seven quasi-linear preference models we compare, our data are best explained by a model that contrasts envy and pride (upward vs downward comparisons) using a value function borrowed from Prospect Theory.

econ.GN