TLDR:
- Polymarket political bets from U.S.-linked wallets reached $571 million in 12 months, topping every other tracked country despite the ban.
- Allium said country-level wallet tags cover only about 6% of political-market wallets, making the data directional rather than exact.
- U.S.-linked wallets favored geopolitical prediction markets, with foreign conflict bets taking a larger share than election contracts.
- American wallets won resolved bets at nearly the same rate as other users, showing bolder positioning rather than a clear trading edge.
Polymarket political bets from U.S.-linked wallets reached about $571 million over the past year, even though the platform cannot legally serve American users. The figure, reported by on-chain analysis firm Allium, placed the United States ahead of every other tracked country. Hong Kong followed with $422 million in political market volume.
The data highlights a sharp gap between official restrictions and actual user behavior. Polymarket blocks U.S. users through IP checks. Yet crypto wallets, stablecoins, and VPN access appear to keep the offshore market open to American traders.
Polymarket Political Bets Expose Weak U.S. Access Controls
Polymarket political bets show how hard geographic blocks are to enforce on crypto rails. A traditional financial platform can reject an account, block a bank payment, or stop a broker connection. Polymarket works differently, as users interact through wallets and stablecoins.
That structure leaves fewer points of control. A VPN can mask a location, while a crypto wallet can settle trades without a bank in the middle. Allium’s tracking looked at wallet behavior instead of IP addresses, so the same VPN that bypasses access controls does not erase on-chain patterns.
The firm added an important limit. It can link only about 6% of political-market wallets to a specific country. That means the $571 million figure should not be treated as a precise total. Still, the scale points to strong U.S. demand for offshore prediction markets.
The finding also raises a harder regulatory question. Polymarket’s ban may satisfy a legal access rule, yet it does not fully stop U.S.-linked wallets from trading. Instead, activity moves to a venue outside direct U.S. oversight.
Geopolitical Markets Pull More U.S.-Linked Wallet Activity
The bigger surprise is what American wallets traded. U.S.-linked wallets put 46% of their political volume into geopolitics, compared with 36% across Polymarket overall. Elections accounted for only 16% of U.S. volume, while the full platform average stood near 32%.
That split suggests American traders used Polymarket political bets less for election speculation and more for foreign conflict markets. Iran-related contracts were especially active. Five of the twelve largest U.S. wallet markets involved bets linked to an Iran conflict.
At one stage, American wallets placed 53% of their volume on a U.S. invasion of Iran. The rest of the platform stood at 26% on the same theme. That gap shows higher conviction among U.S.-linked wallets, though not better accuracy.
The largest single U.S.-linked market was more unusual. A contract on whether Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy would wear a suit drew $20.8 million in trading volume. That market shows how offshore prediction markets list contracts that regulated U.S. venues often avoid.
Kalshi and compliant U.S. prediction venues focus more on elections, economic data, and rate decisions. Offshore polymarket markets include ceasefires, regime change, and war-related outcomes. That difference appears to pull U.S.-linked wallets toward the markets domestic rules restrict.
Resolved market data did not show a major U.S. betting edge. American wallets backed winners 81.9% of the time, close to 80.3% for other users. The main distinction was not accuracy. It was stronger interest in politically sensitive markets beyond U.S. regulatory reach.
