Share 
Bonus TL;DR
- A recent data analysis of nearly three million prediction market wallets revealed that more than two-thirds of retail participants on a major international platform finished below break-even.
- The research highlighted a significant performance gap among different trading sectors, noting that sports-focused users recorded the lowest profitability rate compared to traders concentrating on technology or science markets.
Galaxy Research found that 69.2% of retail Polymarket accounts finished below break-even in a study of 2.9 million wallets, with those traders collectively down $338.9 million.
The report matters because it adds fresh data to a recurring question around prediction markets: whether they function mainly as forecasting tools for observers while remaining a difficult venue for ordinary participants to profit from. Galaxy said its analysis covered only Polymarket’s international platform, not the separate U.S. app.
Galaxy filtered out likely automated accounts before measuring retail results
According to the report, Galaxy used 50 orders per active day as its cutoff for likely automated accounts. That filter removed 125,429 accounts, which placed 80.8% of all orders and finished $246.8 million ahead.
Among the remaining retail wallets, the median account was down about $3. At the other end of the distribution, the bottom 1% of accounts lost at least $4,804.
Galaxy said it used Polymarket’s full on-chain settlement record, with data curated by oracle network Stork.
The report also found that losses appeared linked to weaker retention. Within 30 days of a loss, 15.2% of accounts had not traded again, compared with 6.1% after a win.
Galaxy summed up the dynamic this way: “Polymarket can be an unprofitable endeavor for most participants and a forecasting tool for nonparticipants at the same time.”
Sports specialists posted the weakest profit rate in the study
Galaxy classified 44.1% of traders as specialists, meaning more than 60% of their markets fell under one topic. Sports traders made up 47% of that specialist group.
But sports-focused users were the least profitable category in the study. Only 25.1% of sports specialists finished profitable, the lowest rate of any topic group.
By comparison, tech and science specialists had a 41.2% profit rate, while generalists came in at 30.4%.
That sports skew is notable given Polymarket’s broader push into sports-related trading. The source material also cites a Front Office Sports report that Polymarket pays LeBron James $15 million annually to promote football markets.
What to watch next
Galaxy said nothing in its report undermines the case for prediction markets as “truth machines.” Instead, the findings point to a split between market usefulness and trader outcomes.
The report said the next year could show whether the size or makeup of the prediction market trader base changes sharply. For now, the data suggests most retail participants on Polymarket’s international platform did not make money, and sports-heavy traders performed worst among specialists.
Source: As reported by Kamina Bashir.
