House — Elections, inside two years — the basket

The chance that every one of these markets resolves YES. It is the mathematical opposite of the basket above: the basket is a weighted mean, where one loss doesn't zero it; this is a product, where every market must land. Same markets, opposite risk shape — which is the whole reason to show them together.

The markets shown are this index's most likely holdings, added while the joint probability stays above 1%. Ranking by portfolio weight instead would be arbitrary here, since equal-notional weights are near-identical by design.

Multiplying probabilities assumes the markets are independent — which is precisely wrong for markets grouped by a shared theme, since correlation is why they sit in one index. The range is therefore the honest answer: the true joint probability sits inside it under any correlation structure, with no covariance estimate required.

This is a statistic, not a product. W.E.T. does not offer, quote, accept or route a combined position in these markets, and no venue is quoting one here — the figures are computed by W.E.T. from individual market prices. Each market above trades on its own venue, individually, at the links in the holdings table. Data, not advice.

The basket holds equal notional in each market from its inception mark, so every holding counts equally in return terms rather than the biggest contract dominating. The level is that combined position, re-marked daily at the two-sided mid and rebased to 1000. Settled markets convert to cash at their payoff and wait for the next monthly review.

This is a published benchmark, not an account and not a product: the index is not directly investable. Marks are mid quotes before fees, spread and slippage, and no capacity limit is assumed — a real position would differ. W.E.T. is not an exchange and never handles orders. Data, not advice. Full methodology.