IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/35846.html

Are Prediction Markets Politically Biased?

Author

Listed:
  • Eric Zitzewitz

Abstract

As prediction markets become more prominent, there are concerns that they will be a conduit for political bias. I analyze prediction markets returns from 1880 to 2025 and find no evidence of an overpricing of either left or right-leaning candidates, across a variety of subsamples. In recent elections, there is also no overpricing of either male or female, white or non-white, or young or old candidates. Most political prediction markets exhibit a favorite-longshot bias, and markets on near-term polling averages exhibit a very small overpricing of left-leaning outcomes (e.g., President Trump’s approval falling), which is detectable only because the sample size is large. For elections, however, despite attracting participants who may not be representative of the voting population, prediction markets yield predictions without systematic bias.

Suggested Citation

  • Eric Zitzewitz, 2026. "Are Prediction Markets Politically Biased?," NBER Working Papers 35846, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:35846
    Note: AP LE POL
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w35846.pdf
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text is generally limited to series subscribers, however if the top level domain of the client browser is in a developing country or transition economy free access is provided. More information about subscriptions and free access is available at http://www.nber.org/wwphelp.html. Free access is also available to older working papers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • G13 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Contingent Pricing; Futures Pricing
    • G4 - Financial Economics - - Behavioral Finance
    • P0 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:35846. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.