Can you insider-trade on an investigation into your own insider trading? Polymarket just turned that philosophical puzzle into a real-world headache.
What happened
Polymarket—an offshore prediction market that lets users bet on real-world events—launched a contract allowing people to wager on which company would be named in an upcoming probe. The contract drew heavy interest, pulling in roughly $40 million in volume since Monday. Then blockchain researcher ZachXBT published a report Thursday morning naming crypto trading firm Axiom as the company whose employees he believes used non-public information to place profitable trades.
The twist: traders appear to have had the answer before the report went public.
On-chain evidence
Multiple blockchain sleuths and analytics terminals flagged striking, concentrated bets on Axiom before ZachXBT’s publication:
- Lookonchain identified 12 wallets that heavily backed Axiom ahead of the reveal, collectively netting north of $1 million in profit.
- Polysights, which tracks suspicious activity on Polymarket’s public ledger, flagged five wallets that together wagered about $50,000 and walked away with roughly $266,000.
- CoinDesk’s on-chain analysis shows the largest “Yes” holder on the Axiom market—an account called predictorxyz—accumulated 477,415 shares at an average price of $0.14 and now sits on about $411,000 in profit (roughly a 7x return). The second-largest holder purchased 109,450 shares at $0.33.
Market dynamics underscore the abnormality: for most of the week another company, Meteora, held favorite odds above 50%. Odds swung toward Axiom late Wednesday and peaked at about 46.2%. Anyone buying significant Axiom positions in that narrow window between the apparent denial and ZachXBT’s Thursday publication was likely either prescient or already informed.
How a leak could have happened
ZachXBT confirmed he had contacted Axiom for comment and conducted several interviews before publishing, calling any leak “probably inevitable.” That admission implies multiple people at Axiom knew a report was imminent—any of whom could have traded or tipped others. Because Polymarket’s offshore platform doesn’t run identity checks, attributing trades to specific employees is difficult without cooperation from the exchange or additional investigative tools.
Axiom’s response
Axiom said it was “shocked and disappointed” by the findings and said it would continue to investigate. The firm did not answer questions about whether it was aware of employees trading on the Polymarket wager.
The irony and implications
Polymarket’s market worked exactly as designed: it created a financial incentive to surface who might be behind the alleged insider trading. But in this case, the mechanism appears to have rewarded the subjects of the investigation rather than the investigators. The episode highlights a thorny intersection of decentralized markets, anonymity, and enforcement: prediction contracts can surface leads—but they can also create opportunities to profit off advance knowledge, complicating attempts to detect and deter insider trading in crypto.
Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news
