WACH2

W.E.T. Inverse Achieved Tech Science Index 6mo

v1StandingExperimentalStanding
No reading published for 2026-11-14

The §2.6 ladder refused this print at rung 2. A refusal is publishable; a carried-forward level is not — so this index shows nothing today rather than yesterday’s number wearing today’s date.

Governed close level
—
no level published
Gauge
—
Divisor
—
what chains this level to the last
Closes
53
latest 2026-11-14
The opposing reading

achieved-tech-science-inside-six-months reads — against this index’s —. Same markets, opposite side.

Coverage
0 of 0 admitted markets pricedκ 0.0000 · floor 0.95weights two-sided-depth · cap 15.0%
Withheld by the sentinel

7 input(s) were quarantined by sentinel/v1 before this close and are excluded from the reading above.

What would make this reading wrong
  • The "achieved" axis stops appearing in tech-science titles: the selector then admits fewer than 6 markets and the index prints nothing rather than a level over a roster that no longer states the thesis.
  • Weight coverage falls below the declared floor of 95%, at which point the published state is insufficient_data and no value is printed — never a value carried forward from the last close that had one.
  • The threshold axis stops framing this board. An axis that frames nothing leaves every member on the venue's own YES framing, which reads the board's listing convention rather than the thesis, and a level computed that way is not a reading of this claim.
How this reading was constructed (7)
  • no constituent was admitted at all — an empty roster is a transport failure, not a finding
  • roster refused [empty-roster]: no canonical event on this tape satisfied the universe: 16530 considered, 0 admitted, rejected as keyword-miss 16513, horizon-outside-window 17. That is a statement about the BOARD on this date, not about the worldview: the close writes insufficient_data and no value rather than reaching for yesterday's number. Note that 17 event(s) passed every other selector and were removed by this index's own declared 60–200d window — an empty roster for a window nothing on the board resolves inside is the window working, not the close failing.
  • universe: resolved by universe/v1 over 16530 candidate canonical event(s) from the `tape-text` source (${m.title ?? ''} ${m.marketRef}), admitting 0. Rejections by reason: keyword-miss 16513, horizon-outside-window 17.
  • universe: the declared 60–200d horizon window (axis 8) was APPLIED and removed 17 event(s) that every other selector admitted. A member resolving outside the window this index publishes is not a member of this index's horizon, whatever else it is.
  • universe: 16513 event(s) missed the keyword screen on the `tape-text` source, which carries ${m.title ?? ''} ${m.marketRef} and NOT the venue subtitle, tag or series the nomination pool sees. That count is the UPPER BOUND on what the richer string could have added here; it is published rather than estimated, because the tape cannot supply the text that would settle it.
  • no complement is available: the base printed nothing (insufficient_data). The identity needs two numbers, and an absent one is never treated as a zero.
  • no published document file was found for this spec, so the byte comparison had nothing to compare against and only the recompile legs ran. The whitepaper is compiled per request by /methodology/<slug>, which is a publication lag rather than a ledger fault — but the ABSENCE is published here, because an unsupplied optional parameter is invisible on the row and that invisibility is what let this leg go unrun.
Why there are two levels on this page

The governed close level above is divisor-chained: it tracks how the desk’s reading of this perspective has moved since 2026-08-14, and it survives a roster change because the divisor absorbs it. It is not a basket total return.

The basket total return below is a position book: it holds a fixed set of contracts from its own inception and reports what that book did, marks and settlements included. A roster change starts a new book rather than being absorbed.

They share a base of 1,000 and nothing else. Expect them to differ, and read the one that answers your question — the chained level for “where does this perspective stand”, the book for “what would holding it have done”.

spec 3402c0a7da2397a9 · methodology 96f61c694976ff4d · closed by standing/v1 · lifecycle experimental · class standing · no directional statement permitted from this print

No value publishedfor 2026-11-14§2.6 rung 2

no constituent was admitted at all — an empty roster is a transport failure, not a finding

Last published reading: 83.01 on 2026-11-01. It is not carried forward.

The same 9 tech-science markets carrying the "achieved" axis across polymarket, read on the down case of the threshold axis rather than the up case.

Basket level · official print27 held · close 2026-11-14
999.06−0.09%since inception · base 1000

hypothetical · mid marks · before fees, spread and slippage

Basket performance

hypothetical · mid marks · before fees, spread and slippage
Basket total return
999.06
Since inception
−0.09%
Cost to cross
—
Holdings marked
37.0% of 27
1 day
+0.09%
7 day
−1.70%
Markets held
27
Settled
1
Rebalanced out
0
Hit rate
—
Cash
50.0%
Inception
2026-08-18
Weighting
Equal notional
Marks
Two-sided mid
Days tracked
55

Equal notional from each holding’s inception mark, re-marked at the two-sided mid. Percentages only, size-blind — never a cash figure and never a performance claim.

Cost to cross is the weighted half-spread at the touch on the newest mark tape: what entering at the quote rather than the midpoint would have cost. It is the price of the FIRST unit and says nothing about the tenth — the resting size beside each holding is published so a reader can judge whether their own size fits. It is not deducted from any return above.

A published measurement of what these markets did together. Not an account, not directly investable; W.E.T. never handles orders.

Holdings · 27 markets

held since 2026-08-18 · the reading above is computed over today's roster, which differs
MarketNowReturn
  • Will the highest score achieved on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 80% or higher?polymarket · NO · entry 92c6 sessions stale94c+1.8%↗
  • OpenAI announces it has achieved AGI before 2027?polymarket · NO · entry 92c1.0¢ spread · 300.8k/14.3k within 5¢94c+2.2%↗
  • Will the highest score achieved by an OpenAI model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 70% or higher?polymarket · NO · entry 95c98c+3.6%↗
  • Will the highest score achieved by an Anthropic Claude model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 75% or higher?polymarket · NO · entry 95c94c−1.6%↗
  • Will the highest score achieved by an Anthropic Claude model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 55% or higher?polymarket · NO · entry 14c15 sessions stale13c−4.8%↗
  • Will the highest score achieved by an Anthropic Claude model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 70% or higher?polymarket · NO · entry 92c75c−18.0%↗
  • Will the highest score achieved by a Google Gemini model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 70% or higher?polymarket · NO · entry 92c97c+4.9%↗
  • Will the highest score achieved by a Moonshot Kimi model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 65% or higher?polymarket · NO · entry 95c6 sessions stale93c−1.4%↗
  • Will the highest score achieved by a Moonshot Kimi model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 45% or higher?polymarket · NO · entry 6c12 sessions stale12c+110.0%↗
  • Will the highest score achieved by an OpenAI model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 65% or higher?polymarket · NO · entry 91c79c−12.7%↗
  • Will the highest score achieved on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 70% or higher?polymarket · NO · entry 84c6 sessions stale84c0.0%↗
  • Will the highest score achieved by an Anthropic Claude model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 65% or higher?polymarket · NO · entry 85c2 sessions stale81c−4.7%↗
  • Will the highest score achieved on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 65% or higher?polymarket · NO · entry 74c6 sessions stale71c−4.1%↗
  • Will the highest score achieved on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 75% or higher?polymarket · NO · entry 92c6 sessions stale95c+3.4%↗
  • Will the highest score achieved by a Google Gemini model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 50% or higher?polymarket · NO · entry 27c15 sessions stale6c−78.3%↗
  • Will the highest score achieved by an OpenAI model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 55% or higher?polymarket · NO · entry 46c2.0¢ spread · 554/7.9k within 5¢8c−82.4%↗
  • Will the highest score achieved on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 90% or higher?polymarket · NO · entry 94c6 sessions stale95c+1.0%↗
  • Will the highest score achieved by an OpenAI model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 60% or higher?polymarket · NO · entry 66c52c−20.6%↗
  • Will the highest score achieved by a SpaceXAI Grok model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 45% or higher?polymarket · NO · entry 30c42c+38.2%↗
  • Will the highest score achieved by a Moonshot Kimi model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 50% or higher?polymarket · NO · entry 63c6 sessions stale75c+19.2%↗
  • Will the highest score achieved by a Meta model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 70% or higher?polymarket · NO · entry 94c6 sessions stale95c+0.7%↗
  • Will the highest score achieved by a Meta model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 55% or higher?polymarket · NO · entry 56c6 sessions stale84c+50.0%↗
  • Will the highest score achieved by a Meta model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 65% or higher?polymarket · NO · entry 87c6 sessions stale95c+10.2%↗
  • Will the highest score achieved by a Moonshot Kimi model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 60% or higher?polymarket · NO · entry 89c6 sessions stale89c0.0%↗
  • Will the highest score achieved on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 60% or higher?polymarket · NO · entry 33c6 sessions stale28c−15.4%↗
  • Will the highest score achieved by a SpaceXAI Grok model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 60% or higher?polymarket · NO · entry 85c86c+1.2%↗
  • Will the highest score achieved by an OpenAI model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 50% or higher?polymarket · NO · entry 20c36 sessions stale1c−95.0%↗

Full basket ledger — settled outcomes, rebalance history, methodology →

WACH2 · at a glance

What it is
The same 9 tech-science markets carrying the "achieved" axis across polymarket, read on the down case of the threshold axis rather than the up case.
High vs low
Higher = the composition is pricing more support for this thesis. Lower = less. A reading of market prices, not a W.E.T. forecast.
Who cares
Anyone tracking how achieved is being priced across venues on a composition of at least 6 markets resolving inside 200 days.

Embed this score

always the latest published reading, dated · attribution built in

Put the live WACH2 reading on your own site, README, or newsletter.

Badge For articles, profiles & READMEs

WET Index Score badge preview

The index. Ready to share. Actual embed

Markdown badge
[![WACH2 — WET Index Score](https://www.worldeventtrading.com/api/indices/achieved-tech-science-inside-six-months-inverse/badge)](https://www.worldeventtrading.com/indices/achieved-tech-science-inside-six-months-inverse)
HTML badge
<a href="https://www.worldeventtrading.com/indices/achieved-tech-science-inside-six-months-inverse"><img src="https://www.worldeventtrading.com/api/indices/achieved-tech-science-inside-six-months-inverse/badge" alt="WACH2 — WET Index Score" /></a>
Iframe card
<iframe src="https://www.worldeventtrading.com/embed/indices/achieved-tech-science-inside-six-months-inverse" width="340" height="170" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" title="WACH2 — WET Index Score" loading="lazy"></iframe>

Quote this index

free to cite with attribution + the as-of date
“The W.E.T. Inverse Achieved Tech Science Index 6mo (WACH2) publishes a daily WET Index Score on a 0–100 scale, per World Event Trading.”

Full methodology →JSONLive intradayDaily report

Maintained by Corbin V King. A benchmark reading of market prices — data, not advice. See the disclaimer.