On July 24, a viral post said a Polymarket wallet had made about $917,000 in a single session and won 23 of 24 five-minute markets on the price of BNB. Half of that claim holds up. MSR’s ledger for the July 17 session records a cash gain of $917,311.53 before rebates. It also records 21 positive and three negative market results, not 23 wins. Claim and reconstruction
The difference comes from what counts as a win. A wallet can hold the winning outcome and still lose money in that market, for example when it bought both outcomes and its winning shares paid back less than the whole position cost. MSR counts a market as positive only when the cash that came back exceeded what the wallet spent there. It also subtracts every purchase from every receipt before calling the session profitable.
The ledger covers a session that ran from 09:12 to 12:19 UTC. During it, the wallet made 139 buy fills across 24 of 39 consecutive five-minute markets and never sold. It spent $449,469.69 and got back $1,366,781.22 from winning-share payouts and one return of matched shares, a difference of $917,311.53. Rebates credited later added $3,867.27, bringing the total to $921,178.80. Session cash ledger
From $449,470 spent to $921,179 after rebates
July 17 session · USD · cash returns include 21 redemptions and one merge
| Component | Amount |
|---|---|
| Purchase cost | −$449,469.69 |
| Cash returned | +$1,366,781.22 |
| Result before rebates | +$917,311.53 |
| Later rebates | +$3,867.27 |
| Result including rebates | +$921,178.80 |
1,366,781.22 − 449,469.69 + 3,867.27 = 921,178.80 dollars
Twenty-one of the 24 market results were positive, or 87.5%. MSR also tried looser counting rules, including treating any market where the wallet bought some winning shares as a win. None reached 23; the highest count was 22. A large session gain can include several losing markets, and this one did. Counting tests and label discrepancy
21 markets gained; three lost
Market-level net cash results · ordered as in the source ledger
21 ÷ 24 × 100 = 87.5%
Late buys that followed the price
Each contract asked whether BNB’s specified reference price would finish a five-minute window higher or lower. The wallet’s median purchase came 104 seconds before the window closed. Among fills made with 90 seconds or less remaining, 79.7% of the dollars bought the direction in which Binance’s spot price had already moved, and 2.9% bought the opposite direction. The median spot move by then was small: about 0.07%, or seven basis points. Timing and reference-price comparison
Not every purchase came late, however. Thirty fills came before their contract windows had even opened, some as much as 458 seconds early.
Late purchases mostly followed the existing spot direction
Fills with 90 seconds or less remaining · shares of dollars in that group · scale 0–100%
One market paid off without a prediction
In one market, the wallet bought both Up and Down shares at 20 cents each. A matched pair covers both outcomes and can be returned for $1 of backing without waiting for the result. Paying 40 cents for a pair worth $1 left a 60-cent gross difference before other costs. After a small unmatched remainder expired worthless, that market produced a net gain of $26,069.03. Paired-share mechanism
The paired-share arithmetic
Recorded matched-pair mechanism · per pair · gross before additional costs
$1.00 − ($0.20 + $0.20) = $0.60 gross per matched pair
All 24 market cash results
Published rounded figures · before session rebates · source order
Open the complete 24-row ledger
| # | Window · ET | Side(s) | Fills | Cost | Cash returned | Net |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | 5:10AM–5:15AM ET | Up | 3 | $2,361.88 | $11,809.40 | $9,447.52 |
| 02 | 5:20AM–5:25AM ET | Up | 15 | $4,807.59 | $24,037.97 | $19,230.37 |
| 03 | 5:25AM–5:30AM ET | Up | 5 | $3,612.35 | $36,123.45 | $32,511.11 |
| 04 | 5:30AM–5:35AM ET | Down | 21 | $21.85 | $198.66 | $176.80 |
| 05 | 5:35AM–5:40AM ET | Up | 4 | $3,549.42 | $35,494.15 | $31,944.74 |
| 06 | 5:40AM–5:45AM ET | Up | 4 | $21,017.28 | $42,034.56 | $21,017.28 |
| 07 | 5:45AM–5:50AM ET | Down | 3 | $29,659.06 | $59,318.12 | $29,659.06 |
| 08 | 5:50AM–5:55AM ET | Up | 3 | $11,830.35 | — | −$11,830.35 |
| 09 | 5:55AM–6:00AM ET | Down | 3 | $12,899.30 | $58,633.18 | $45,733.88 |
| 10 | 6:00AM–6:05AM ET | Up | 10 | $36,399.98 | $69,999.97 | $33,599.99 |
| 11 | 6:05AM–6:10AM ET | Up | 2 | $19,744.43 | $89,747.42 | $70,002.99 |
| 12 | 6:10AM–6:15AM ET | Down + Up | 14 | $1,686.28 | $79.64 | −$1,606.64 |
| 13 | 6:15AM–6:20AM ET | Down | 11 | $29,999.99 | $59,999.98 | $29,999.99 |
| 14 | 6:30AM–6:35AM ET | Up | 2 | $20,980.68 | $104,903.41 | $83,922.73 |
| 15 | 6:45AM–6:50AM ET | Down + Up | 8 | $24,371.30 | $50,440.32 | $26,069.03 |
| 16 | 6:55AM–7:00AM ET | Down | 7 | $18,987.52 | $94,937.62 | $75,950.09 |
| 17 | 7:05AM–7:10AM ET | Down | 4 | $27,437.15 | — | −$27,437.15 |
| 18 | 7:15AM–7:20AM ET | Down | 6 | $31,529.59 | $95,544.23 | $64,014.63 |
| 19 | 7:25AM–7:30AM ET | Down | 2 | $19,122.90 | $70,825.55 | $51,702.65 |
| 20 | 7:30AM–7:35AM ET | Down | 2 | $9,194.37 | $91,943.74 | $82,749.37 |
| 21 | 7:35AM–7:40AM ET | Up | 3 | $37,557.42 | $93,893.54 | $56,336.12 |
| 22 | 7:50AM–7:55AM ET | Up | 2 | $14,005.63 | $140,056.31 | $126,050.68 |
| 23 | 8:10AM–8:15AM ET | Up | 1 | $40,062.56 | $50,000.00 | $9,937.44 |
| 24 | 8:20AM–8:25AM ET | Down | 4 | $28,630.80 | $86,760.01 | $58,129.21 |
The ledger answers both halves of the viral post. The cash gain was real and large. The win count was overstated, because the session included three losing markets. For anyone judging a trader from a screenshot, the dollar result and the win count have to be checked separately.