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. Inverse Increases Economics Index 6mo
v1StandingExperimentalStandingThe §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.
increases-economics-inside-six-months reads — against this index’s —. Same markets, opposite side.
32 input(s) were quarantined by sentinel/v1 before this close and are excluded from the reading above.
- The "increases" axis stops appearing in economics 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 (10)
- 2 priced constituent(s) against this spec's 6 floor — below it there is no index, there is a market
- 2 of 2 published weight(s) exceed the declared 0.15 cap — the largest is 0.500000. No valid capped vector exists for this roster, so `cappedWeights` returned one that violates the ceiling: at n = 1 it short-circuits at [1] before its own cap-feasibility test; when cap·n < 1 the equal-weight fallback 1/n is above the cap by definition; and when the members carrying a weighable basis number fewer than 1/cap the fixpoint caps them all, finds no room left to redistribute into, and renormalizes them back above the ceiling. The cap is NOT enforced on this vector and the row says so rather than printing a ceiling it did not apply.
- the weight vector is degenerate — the 0.15 cap is unreachable with 2 constituents (cap·n = 0.3000 < 1), so the weights are equal, not basis-derived
- universe: resolved by universe/v1 over 9403 candidate canonical event(s) from the `tape-text` source (
${m.title ?? ''}${m.marketRef}), admitting 4. Rejections by reason: keyword-miss 9388, category-not-admitted 1, horizon-outside-window 10. - universe: the declared 60–200d horizon window (axis 8) was APPLIED and removed 10 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: 9388 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: 2 of 4 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: price-below-floor 2. 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 `threshold` framing axis (§3.3) was re-read on this tape and took force on the `up` case by rule `member-majority`, framing 2 of 2 members and holding 0 of them NO. 2 of 2 framed members carry the `up` case on the declared threshold axis, so this composition measures up; a member the axis frames the other way moves against that and is held NO. 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).
- 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.
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 3a27d8c6f84d4276 · methodology c09553154875eceb · closed by standing/v1 · lifecycle experimental · class standing · no directional statement permitted from this print
2 priced constituent(s) against this spec's 6 floor — below it there is no index, there is a market
Last published reading: 83.05 on 2026-08-27. It is not carried forward.
The same 6 economics markets carrying the "increases" axis across polymarket, read on the down case of the threshold axis rather than the up case.
hypothetical · mid marks · before fees, spread and slippage
Basket performance
hypothetical · mid marks · before fees, spread and slippage- Basket total return
- 903.42
- Since inception
- −9.66%
- Cost to cross
- —
- Holdings marked
- 100.0% of 6
- 1 day
- −2.08%
- 7 day
- −1.53%
- Markets held
- 6
- Settled
- 0
- Rebalanced out
- 0
- Hit rate
- —
- Cash
- 55.4%
- 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 · 6 markets
held since 2026-08-18 · the reading above is computed over today's roster, which differs- Reserve Bank of New Zealand increases interest rates by 25 bps at the October 2026 meeting?polymarket · NO · entry 57cpolymarketNO57c44c−24.3%16.7%Polymarket ↗
- Bank of England increases interest rates by 25 bps after November 2026 meeting?polymarket · NO · entry 90cpolymarketNO90c19c−78.8%16.7%Polymarket ↗
- Bank of Japan increases interest rates by 25 bps after the October 2026 meeting?polymarket · NO · entry 77cpolymarketNO77c82c+6.5%16.7%Polymarket ↗
- Bank of Japan increases interest rates by 50+ bps after the October 2026 meeting?polymarket · NO · entry 96cpolymarketNO96c99c+3.2%16.7%Polymarket ↗
- Bank of Mexico increases interest rates by 25 bps after November 2026 meeting?polymarket · NO · entry 94cpolymarketNO94c84c−10.6%16.6%Polymarket ↗
- Reserve Bank of Australia increases interest rates by 25 bps at the November 2026 meeting?polymarket · NO · entry 82cpolymarketNO82c72c−11.8%16.6%Polymarket ↗
Full basket ledger — settled outcomes, rebalance history, methodology →
Contribution by category
weight share of the roster the last close weighedConstituents by weight
all 2 · what today's reading was computed over (2026-09-22) · the basket below holds a different setWINC6 · at a glance
- What it is
- The same 6 economics markets carrying the "increases" 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 increases 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 WINC6 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/increases-economics-inside-six-months-inverse)<a href="https://www.worldeventtrading.com/indices/increases-economics-inside-six-months-inverse"><img src="https://www.worldeventtrading.com/api/indices/increases-economics-inside-six-months-inverse/badge" alt="WINC6 — WET Index Score" /></a><iframe src="https://www.worldeventtrading.com/embed/indices/increases-economics-inside-six-months-inverse" width="340" height="170" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" title="WINC6 — WET Index Score" loading="lazy"></iframe>Quote this index
free to cite with attribution + the as-of date“The W.E.T. Inverse Increases Economics Index 6mo (WINC6) publishes a daily WET Index Score on a 0–100 scale, per World Event Trading.”
Maintained by Corbin V King. A benchmark reading of market prices — data, not advice. See the disclaimer.