69% of Retail Polymarket Traders Finish in the Red, Galaxy Finds

Galaxy Research found that 69.2% of retail Polymarket accounts finished below break-even in a study of 2.9 million wallets. Together, those traders sit $338.9 million in the red.

The analysis draws on Polymarket’s full on-chain settlement record, with data curated by oracle network Stork. It covers only the international platform, which runs separately from the US app.

How Galaxy Separated Humans From Scripts

Galaxy used 50 orders per active day as its cutoff for likely automated accounts. The firm called the threshold a judgment call, since trading frequency shows no natural break.

That filter removed 125,429 accounts, which placed 80.8% of all orders and finished $246.8 million ahead.

Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens

Distribution of Profitability Across Polymarket accounts. Source: Galaxy Research

Among the remaining retail wallets, the median account is down about $3. Larger losses sit in the tails, with the bottom 1% losing at least $4,804.

Losing also appears to push traders away. Within 30 days of a loss, 15.2% of accounts had not traded again, against 6.1% after a win. Galaxy cautioned that it cannot link multiple wallets to one person, so some apparent quitters may have switched to new addresses.

The results line up with a Yale study showing 3% of Polymarket traders captured 27% of profits. In July, BeInCrypto reported that about two-thirds of 194,000 addresses finished underwater on Polymarket’s World Cup winner market.

Sports Specialists Bring Up the Rear

Galaxy classified 44.1% of traders as specialists, meaning more than 60% of their markets fell under one topic. Sports traders make up 47% of that group.

Only 25.1% of sports specialists finished profitable, the lowest rate of any topic. In contrast, tech and science specialists reached 41.2%, against 30.4% for generalists.

Polymarket’s recent marketing push centers on its separate US exchange. Front Office Sports reported that the company pays LeBron James $15 million a year to promote football markets. Galaxy argued that this spending targets the sports-focused traders who fared worst in its international data.

Galaxy said nothing in its report “undermines the case for prediction markets as truth machines.” It suggested a losing majority may be necessary, since informed traders need uninformed flow to trade against.