Readings may not describe today5 scheduled closes did not landWhy →Hide
5 scheduled closes did not land — the daily index publish was due at 10:37 UTC on 2026-09-23 and the newest print on file is still 2026-09-22. The reading below is carried forward from that date and does not describe today.
Readings below are the last that settled; none has been carried forward, restated or interpolated to cover the gap. Every row states its own date and wears its own age. How the desk publishes
W.E.T. Anthropic Financials Index 6mo
v1StandingExperimentalStanding32 input(s) were quarantined by sentinel/v1 before this close and are excluded from the reading above.
- The "anthropic" axis stops appearing in financials 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 8, severity frames 0 of 8, threshold frames 1 of 8), 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 (6)
- universe: resolved by universe/v1 over 9403 candidate canonical event(s) from the `tape-text` source (
${m.title ?? ''}${m.marketRef}), admitting 11. Rejections by reason: keyword-miss 9307, category-not-admitted 80, horizon-outside-window 5. - universe: the declared 60–200d horizon window (axis 8) was APPLIED and removed 5 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: 9307 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. - orientation: the declared `threshold` framing axis (§3.3) was re-read on this tape and took NO force [undetermined:coverage], framing 0 of 11 members and holding 0 of them NO. The declared threshold axis frames 0 of 11 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 `threshold` 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.
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 b90d559d1451c9cf · methodology 613775094f08c9d5 · closed by standing/v1 · lifecycle experimental · class standing
As of Sep 22, 2026 · last moved Sep 22, 2026 · scale 0–100 (Low support → High support)
11 financials markets carrying the "anthropic" axis across polymarket, every one resolving inside six months, tracked as one composition.
hypothetical · mid marks · before fees, spread and slippage
Basket performance
hypothetical · mid marks · before fees, spread and slippage- Basket total return
- 912.56
- Since inception
- −8.74%
- Cost to cross
- —
- Holdings marked
- 63.6% of 22
- 1 day
- +1.66%
- 7 day
- −1.77%
- Markets held
- 22
- Settled
- 1
- Rebalanced out
- 0
- Hit rate
- —
- Cash
- 57.5%
- Inception
- 2026-08-18
- Weighting
- Equal notional
- Marks
- Two-sided mid
- Days tracked
- 33
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 · 22 markets
held since 2026-08-18 · the reading above is computed over today's roster, which differs- Will Anthropic's valuation hit (LOW) $600B by December 31?polymarket · YES · entry 3cpolymarketYES3c3c−23.5%15.0%Polymarket ↗
- Will Anthropic's valuation hit (LOW) $700B by December 31?polymarket · YES · entry 7cpolymarketYES7c4c−46.2%11.8%Polymarket ↗
- Anthropic vs OpenAI - higher valuation on December 31?polymarket · YES · entry 93c2.0¢ spread · 5.8k/5.1k within 5¢polymarketYES93c92c−1.1%7.9%Polymarket ↗
- Will Anthropic's valuation hit (HIGH) $5.0T by December 31?polymarket · YES · entry 7cpolymarketYES7c6c−14.6%5.6%Polymarket ↗
- Will Anthropic's market cap be between $1.25T and $1.5T at market close on IPO day?polymarket · YES · entry 9c4 sessions stalepolymarketYES9c4c−56.7%5.4%Polymarket ↗
- Will Anthropic's market cap be between $2.25T and $2.5T at market close on IPO day?polymarket · YES · entry 16c4 sessions stalepolymarketYES16c19c+19.4%5.2%Polymarket ↗
- Will Anthropic's market cap be between $2.0T and $2.25T at market close on IPO day?polymarket · YES · entry 16c4 sessions stalepolymarketYES16c24c+47.2%4.2%Polymarket ↗
- Will Anthropic's valuation hit (HIGH) $1.5T by December 31?polymarket · YES · entry 92c1.0¢ spread · 12.8k/13.1k within 5¢polymarketYES92c91c−1.6%3.9%Polymarket ↗
- Will Anthropic's market cap be between $1.5T and $1.75T at market close on IPO day?polymarket · YES · entry 17c1.9¢ spread · 46.3k/1.3k within 5¢polymarketYES17c6c−65.7%3.9%Polymarket ↗
- Will Anthropic's valuation hit (LOW) $800B by December 31?polymarket · YES · entry 8cpolymarketYES8c3c−64.7%3.7%Polymarket ↗
- Will Anthropic's valuation hit (HIGH) $2.0T by December 31?polymarket · YES · entry 68cpolymarketYES68c69c+2.2%3.7%Polymarket ↗
- Will Anthropic's valuation hit (HIGH) $3.0T by December 31?polymarket · YES · entry 33cpolymarketYES33c25c−24.6%3.2%Polymarket ↗
- Will Anthropic's valuation hit (HIGH) $1.75T by December 31?polymarket · YES · entry 81cpolymarketYES81c82c+1.2%3.2%Polymarket ↗
- Will Anthropic's market cap be less than $1.25T at market close on IPO day?polymarket · YES · entry 3c4 sessions stalepolymarketYES3c2c−41.4%3.2%Polymarket ↗
- Will Anthropic's valuation hit (HIGH) $2.5T by December 31?polymarket · YES · entry 48cpolymarketYES48c42c−12.6%2.7%Polymarket ↗
- Will Anthropic's market cap be $3.0T or greater at market close on IPO day?polymarket · YES · entry 8c4 sessions stalepolymarketYES8c6c−26.0%2.4%Polymarket ↗
- Will Anthropic's valuation hit (HIGH) $4.0T by December 31?polymarket · YES · entry 12cpolymarketYES12c6c−49.1%2.2%Polymarket ↗
- Will Anthropic's market cap be between $1.75T and $2.0T at market close on IPO day?polymarket · YES · entry 17c1.0¢ spread · 28.3k/6.7k within 5¢polymarketYES17c20c+18.2%2.2%Polymarket ↗
- Will Anthropic's market cap be between $2.75T and $3.0T at market close on IPO day?polymarket · YES · entry 6c4 sessions stalepolymarketYES6c5c−15.5%2.0%Polymarket ↗
- Will Anthropic not IPO by December 31, 2027?polymarket · YES · entry 3c4 sessions stalepolymarketYES3c4c+34.8%1.9%Polymarket ↗
- Will Anthropic's market cap be between $2.5T and $2.75T at market close on IPO day?polymarket · YES · entry 11c4 sessions stalepolymarketYES11c14c+30.7%1.8%Polymarket ↗
- Anthropic + OpenAI vs Microsoft - higher valuation on December 31?polymarket · YES · entry 37cpolymarketYES37c48c+29.7%0.2%Polymarket ↗
Full basket ledger — settled outcomes, rebalance history, methodology →
Key statistics
- Previous
- —
- Band
- Moderate
- 28d Range
- 4054
- Percentile
- 25th
- 8d Change
- +4.6
- Volatility
- 4.3 pts/d
- Streak
- —
- Markets
- 11
- Effective N
- 8.5
- Top Weight
- 15%
- Venues
- 11 P
- Method
- v1
Indicative tape · 7 sessions
133 hourly readings since 2026-09-22 · not the governed closeINDICATIVEHourly 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
28d published · interactive28 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. 12 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 = 28d published · dashed = projected · shaded = 80% bandModel extrapolation of the published series (robust trend, 28 readings, slope -0.12/day, projection σ 5.2 pts/d widened for a 28-reading sample) — a benchmark projection, not a W.E.T. forecast.
Desk read
W.E.T. analysis — PremiumPremium
The desk's read on today's move
Why the index moved, in the desk's words — not just the arithmetic.
What moved today
attribution — PremiumPremium
Which markets moved the index, and by how much
Signed contribution per constituent, ranked.
Contribution by category
weight share of today's valueConstituents by weight
all 11 · what today's reading was computed over (2026-09-22) · the basket below holds a different setWhere these markets are covered
1 of 11 constituents has a W.E.T. pageThe odds pages covering the individual contracts this index reads. They are the evidence underneath the reading, not readings themselves.
WANTH · at a glance
- What it is
- 11 financials markets carrying the "anthropic" 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 anthropic 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 inPut the live WANTH reading on your own site, README, or newsletter.
Badge For articles, profiles & READMEs
The index. Ready to share. Actual embed
[](https://www.worldeventtrading.com/indices/anthropic-financials-inside-six-months)<a href="https://www.worldeventtrading.com/indices/anthropic-financials-inside-six-months"><img src="https://www.worldeventtrading.com/api/indices/anthropic-financials-inside-six-months/badge" alt="WANTH — WET Index Score" /></a><iframe src="https://www.worldeventtrading.com/embed/indices/anthropic-financials-inside-six-months" width="340" height="170" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" title="WANTH — WET Index Score" loading="lazy"></iframe>Quote this index
free to cite with attribution + the as-of date“As of Sep 22, 2026, the W.E.T. Anthropic Financials Index 6mo (WANTH) prints a WET Index Score of 44.5/100 (Moderate), per World Event Trading.”
Maintained by Corbin V King. A benchmark reading of market prices — data, not advice. See the disclaimer.