September 2024 Gamblers Were More Bullish than Voters on Harris Win

Excel charts make for an ugly blog. So why not a gratuitous photo of Sugar in front of a mid-1960s Facel-Vega III?


IEM VS: IEM vote share contracts; WAF VS: Werewolves Adjustment Factor applied to IEM VS

At the end of September 2024, IEM voter share contracts averaged $0.56 for the Democratic presidential candidate (Harris), and $0.47 for the Republican presidential candidate. By applying the Werewolves Adjustment Factor (WAF) to account for traders' historic over- and under-valuations of Democratic and Republic vote shares, at the end of September 2024, a good guess might be 53% of the votes for Harris and 48% for Trump (which adds up to more than 100% of the vote share--but hey, the smart money had spoken, if not amongst themselves).

Maxim Lott and John Stossel's Election Betting Odds site tracks presidential bets made on commercial gambling sites. On September 30, their method gave Harris a 52% chance of winning. In the case of both Lott-Stossel and WAF VS, there's about a 5 percentage point margin in favor of Harris.

By contrast, polls tracked by both the New York Times and Nate Silver's Silver Bulletin showed just a 3 percentage point margin on September 30.

Of course none of this matters for the election because national voter shares don't decide who becomes President in January 2025. But if by November 5 the election polls as of September turned out to be correct, the two-party vote share would be 52% for Harris and 48% for Trump--which means that September holders of Democratic contracts would probably lose about 9% on their positions, while holders of Republican contracts would earn about 2%.

It's worth noting, though, that we're not talking huge wins or losses in the IEM market. Only 461 units were purchased on Democratic contracts in September, for a grand total of $260.11 wagered. Republican vote share contracts wagered $113.88--bringing the grand total for the entire 2024 election cycle to $1,405.24. This compares pretty well to the 2020 cycle over the same period ($1,755.52), but it's not even a drop in the ocean compared to the nearly $1.2 billion in wagers tracked by Lott and Stossel. Yet both the academic and commercial markets seem to be converging on similar answers: Harris gets more votes. But it's hard so see how average Democratic contract holder could make back their stakes.

So the big lesson is one that everyone should have already known: if you want to make money on gambling, it pays to be the house.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Sugar Gets Around: Jardin du Luxembourg

Art Nouveau Fever Dream: 29 Ave. Rapp

Side Trips: The Arctic Circle