WANGE

W.E.T. Angeles Sports Index 6mo

v1StandingExperimentalStanding
Governed close level
—
no level published
Gauge
56.40
0–100 · rung 6
Divisor
—
what chains this level to the last
Closes
53
latest 2026-11-14
Coverage
12 of 12 admitted markets pricedκ 1.0000 · 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 "angeles" axis stops appearing in sports 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.
  • A published axis starts framing this board. No axis frames a majority of it today (polarity frames 0 of 18, severity frames 0 of 18, threshold frames 0 of 18), and that measurement is what put this worldview on a side-symmetric lens; a composition whose sides become readable is a different index and belongs to a successor spec rather than to an edit of this one.
How this reading was constructed (7)
  • universe: resolved by universe/v1 over 16530 candidate canonical event(s) from the `tape-text` source (${m.title ?? ''} ${m.marketRef}), admitting 45. Rejections by reason: keyword-miss 16345, horizon-outside-window 140.
  • universe: the declared 60–200d horizon window (axis 8) was APPLIED and removed 140 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: 16345 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.
  • eligibility: 33 of 45 admitted event(s) left the roster on the spec's own declared eligibility (minVolume 250, maxSpread 0.1, price 0.02-0.98) — by reason: below-min-volume 23, price-below-floor 7, spread-too-wide 3. An ineligible market is out of the universe; a member the close could not price stays in it and is counted against κ.
  • orientation: the declared `polarity` framing axis (§3.3) was re-read on this tape and took NO force [undetermined:coverage], framing 0 of 12 members and holding 0 of them NO. The declared polarity axis frames 0 of 12 members (0%), under the published 50% bar, so it takes no force today and no member is flipped by it. An axis that frames a corner of the board would state a direction for members it never read. This is the spec's own invalidation condition, measured rather than assumed. The axis is re-read at every close rather than frozen into a declared side table, so a roster whose contracts resolve and are replaced is oriented by the rule this spec published rather than by one evening's reading of it (cultivation-orientation/v3).
  • orientation: because the declared `polarity` axis took no force today, every member not named in `sideRules.declaredSides` and not matched by a keyword list is held on the venue's own YES framing. That reads the board's LISTING CONVENTION rather than this index's thesis, and it is the state the spec's own invalidation conditions name — published here rather than left to look like a decision the axis made.
  • 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 068e1424b8000bf6 · methodology 2b052dbb600d8913 · closed by standing/v1 · lifecycle experimental · class standing

56.40−0.30 (−0.53%)Moderate & cooling, volatile

As of Nov 14, 2026 · last moved Nov 14, 2026 · scale 0–100 (Low support → High support)

12 sports markets carrying the "angeles" axis across polymarket, every one resolving inside six months, tracked as one composition.

Basket level · official print17 held · close 2026-11-14
770.92−22.91%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
770.92
Since inception
−22.91%
Cost to cross
—
Holdings marked
29.4% of 17
1 day
+0.09%
7 day
−1.95%
Markets held
17
Settled
0
Rebalanced out
0
Hit rate
—
Cash
64.9%
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 · 17 markets

held since 2026-08-18 · the reading above is computed over today's roster, which differs
MarketNowReturn
  • Will the Los Angeles Dodgers win the 2026 World Series?polymarket · YES · entry 32c44 sessions stale31c−3.2%↗
  • Will Los Angeles D be the 2026 NL West Division Winnerkalshi · YES · entry 97c31 sessions stale99c+1.5%↗
  • Will Los Angeles Chargers win the 2026 AFC West?polymarket · YES · entry 36c1c−97.2%↗
  • Will Los Angeles Rams win the 2026 NFC West?polymarket · YES · entry 49c9c−82.5%↗
  • Will Los Angeles Rams win the 2027 NFL NFC Championship?polymarket · YES · entry 24c9c−63.8%↗
  • Will Los Angeles FC win the 2026 MLS Cup?polymarket · YES · entry 11c6 sessions stale5c−52.7%↗
  • Will the Los Angeles Chargers make the 2027 NFL Playoffs?polymarket · YES · entry 65c2c−97.7%↗
  • Will Los Angeles Dodgers win the 2026 National League Championship Series?polymarket · YES · entry 44c44 sessions stale42c−5.7%↗
  • Will Los Angeles F win the MLS Cup?kalshi · YES · entry 10c2 sessions stale4c−63.2%↗
  • Will Los Angeles Chargers win the 2027 NFL AFC Championship?polymarket · YES · entry 11c1c−90.5%↗
  • Pro Baseball Champion — Los Angeles Dgemini · YES · entry 34c19 sessions stale30c−11.9%↗
  • NFC Championship Winner — Los Angeles Rgemini · YES · entry 24c15 sessions stale19c−21.3%↗
  • 2027 Pro Football Champion — Los Angeles Rgemini · YES · entry 14c15 sessions stale13c−13.8%↗
  • 2027 Pro Football Champion — Los Angeles Cgemini · YES · entry 5c15 sessions stale2c−66.7%↗
  • National League Champion — Los Angeles Dgemini · YES · entry 45c44 sessions stale40c−11.1%↗
  • MLS Cup Champion — Los Angeles Football Clubgemini · YES · entry 10c15 sessions stale5c−52.6%↗
  • AFC Championship Winner — Los Angeles Cgemini · YES · entry 11c26 sessions stale4c−66.7%↗

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

Key statistics

Previous
56.70
Band
Moderate
22d Range
5382
Percentile
14th
9d Change
−6.1
Volatility
6.0 pts/d
Streak
2d down
Markets
12
Effective N
7.8
Top Weight
15%
Venues
12 P
Method
v1

Indicative tape · 6 sessions

97 hourly readings since 2026-11-04 · not the governed close
54.056.058.060.062.064.010-22 00:0011-03 03:0011-15 05:00
Latest
56.13
Since 2026-11-04
−6.58
Range
54.0–63.6
Readings
67+30 refused

INDICATIVEHourly readings that reprice the roster and frozen weights of the last governed close — only prices moved. Each one was computed and recorded at the timestamp it carries; nothing here is reconstructed from venue history. They carry no sentinel screen, enter no ledger and join no checksum chain, and a refused hour breaks the line rather than being drawn through. The daily WET Close is the official value.

Daily close

22d published · interactive

22 published close(s) — 0–100 (Low support → High support). Drag to pan, scroll to zoom. One slot per published close, not one per day: dates on the axis are real, the spacing between them is not. 71 day(s) inside this window published no close and are not drawn at all. For the calendar-true spacing, read the chart below. Drawn as a line, not candles: a daily close carries no open, high or low, and a candle would assert an intraday range nobody observed.

History & 14-day projection

solid = 22d published · dashed = projected · shaded = 80% band
20406080100now55
Projected 14d
55.00
Change
−1.40
80% band
19–91
Confidence
low

Model extrapolation of the published series (robust trend, 22 readings, slope -0.20/day, projection σ 7.5 pts/d widened for a 22-reading sample) — a benchmark projection, not a W.E.T. forecast.

Desk read

W.E.T. analysis — Insiders
🔒

Insiders

The desk's read on today's move

Why the index moved, in the desk's words — not just the arithmetic.

Checking access…

What moved today

attribution — Insiders
🔒

Insiders

Which markets moved the index, and by how much

Signed contribution per constituent, ranked.

Checking access…

WANGE · at a glance

What it is
12 sports markets carrying the "angeles" axis across polymarket, every one resolving inside six months, tracked as one composition.
High vs low
Higher = the markets are more torn — prices across the composition sit closer to a coin flip. Lower = more decided, in EITHER direction: a basket priced at 5% and one priced at 95% both read low. A reading of market prices, not a W.E.T. forecast.
Who cares
Anyone tracking how angeles 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 WANGE 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
[![WANGE — WET Index Score](https://www.worldeventtrading.com/api/indices/angeles-sports-inside-six-months/badge)](https://www.worldeventtrading.com/indices/angeles-sports-inside-six-months)
HTML badge
<a href="https://www.worldeventtrading.com/indices/angeles-sports-inside-six-months"><img src="https://www.worldeventtrading.com/api/indices/angeles-sports-inside-six-months/badge" alt="WANGE — WET Index Score" /></a>
Iframe card
<iframe src="https://www.worldeventtrading.com/embed/indices/angeles-sports-inside-six-months" width="340" height="170" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" title="WANGE — WET Index Score" loading="lazy"></iframe>

Quote this index

free to cite with attribution + the as-of date
“As of Nov 14, 2026, the W.E.T. Angeles Sports Index 6mo (WANGE) prints a WET Index Score of 56.4/100 (Moderate), 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.