Readings may not describe today6 scheduled closes did not landWhy →
6 behind

6 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

WSAN2

W.E.T. Inverse San Francisco Football Index 6mo

v1StandingExperimentalStanding
Governed close level
938.6985
base 1000 · chained · since 2026-08-14
Gauge
65.08
0–100 · rung 6
Divisor
6.9334e-4
what chains this level to the last
Closes
28
latest 2026-09-22
The opposing reading

san-francisco-football-inside-six-months reads 34.92 against this index’s 65.08. Same markets, opposite side.

Coverage
7 of 7 admitted markets pricedκ 1.0000 · floor 0.95weights two-sided-depth · cap 15.0%
Withheld by the sentinel

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

What would make this reading wrong
  • The board stops listing markets that name San Francisco's football clubs inside this window: 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 San Francisco club in another sport starts sharing this one's published vocabulary, at which point the declared exclusions stop separating the two and the composition would silently become an all-sports index for this metro wearing a single-sport name.
How this reading was constructed (10)
  • universe: resolved by universe/v1 over 9403 candidate canonical event(s) from the `tape-text` source (${m.title ?? ''} ${m.marketRef}), admitting 16. Rejections by reason: excluded-keyword 295, keyword-miss 9089, category-not-admitted 1, horizon-outside-window 2.
  • universe: the declared 60–200d horizon window (axis 8) was APPLIED and removed 2 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: 9089 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.
  • 295 canonical event(s) matched an excludeKeywords term and were not admitted. An exclusion is an ADMISSION decision and never a side one (§3.1): nothing here flips a member, it only declines to hold it.
  • eligibility: 9 of 16 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 5, spread-too-wide 3, price-below-floor 1. 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 NO force [undetermined:coverage], framing 0 of 7 members and holding 0 of them NO. The declared threshold axis frames 0 of 7 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 level was chained as a price relative over the PRIOR composition at today's prices: 12 prior member(s), of which 5 could not be priced today and left through the DIVISOR (0 at a venue-reported resolution, 5 at their last governed mark, 0 unpriced on both dates). Price relative 0.970940548 against a gauge basis of 0.650834406; the divisor moved to absorb the composition and weight change, so what the level published is the price move and nothing else.
  • the divisor this level chains from was struck on 2026-09-17, 2 close(s) ago, and 2 of those close(s) published no level at all. The chain is therefore measured against the 12-member composition of 2026-09-17 rather than against yesterday. A gap this shape is what a permanently refused level looks like from the outside, so it is published rather than left for a reader to infer from a hole in the chart.
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 1bd05fd445b8fd66 · methodology 1cfebe532627797f · closed by standing/v1 · lifecycle experimental · class standing

65.08Stale · 6 closes behindElevated & cooling, volatile

As of Sep 22, 2026 · last moved Sep 22, 2026 · scale 0–100 (Low support → High support)

The same markets naming San Francisco 49ers, read on the down case of the threshold axis rather than the up case.

Basket level · official print11 held · close 2026-09-28
936.33−6.37%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
936.33
Since inception
−6.37%
Cost to cross
—
Holdings marked
72.7% of 11
1 day
−2.89%
7 day
−3.63%
Markets held
11
Settled
0
Rebalanced out
0
Hit rate
—
Cash
53.4%
Inception
2026-08-18
Weighting
Equal notional
Marks
Two-sided mid
Days tracked
34

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 · 11 markets

held since 2026-08-18 · the reading above is computed over today's roster, which differs
MarketNowReturn
  • Will San Francisco 49ers win the 2027 NFL NFC Championship?polymarket · NO · entry 93c81c−12.4%↗
  • Will San Francisco 49ers win the 2026 NFC West?polymarket · NO · entry 79c59c−24.8%↗
  • Will the Cardinals win the season series against the 49ers during the 2026-27 NFL regular season?polymarket · NO · entry 95c95c−0.2%↗
  • NFC Championship Winner — San Franciscogemini · NO · entry 92c83c−9.3%↗
  • 2027 Pro Football Champion — San Franciscogemini · NO · entry 96c45c−52.9%↗
  • Will the Seahawks win the season series against the 49ers during the 2026-27 NFL regular season?polymarket · NO · entry 66c9 sessions stale77c+16.8%↗
  • Will San Francisco 49ers finish the 2026-27 NFL regular season with the most offensive touchdowns?polymarket · NO · entry 97c97c+0.5%↗
  • Will the 49ers win the season series against the Cardinals during the 2026-27 NFL regular season?polymarket · NO · entry 40c3.0¢ spread · 6.6k/620 within 5¢62c+55.0%↗
  • Will the 49ers win the season series against the Rams during the 2026-27 NFL regular season?polymarket · NO · entry 86c55c−36.1%↗
  • Will the season series between the 49ers and Seahawks end in a tie during the 2026-27 NFL regular season?polymarket · NO · entry 62c9 sessions stale53c−13.8%↗
  • Will the season series between the Cardinals and 49ers end in a tie during the 2026-27 NFL regular season?polymarket · NO · entry 75c55c−26.3%↗

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

The opposing claim

the same roster, read the other way — one close, two series

This index is one side of a pair. The same canonical roster, consolidated once, is read against the opposite case and published as its own governed series — so the counter-argument is a number on the board, not a caveat in the prose.

Read the opposite side →
Pair drift
+95.90index points, both sides combined

Holding both sides of this argument should cost nothing — the outcomes are exhaustive. It does not. The two levels sum to 2095.90 against a combined base of 2,000, and that gap is path, spread and friction rather than a view about the world. Gauges complement exactly; levels do not, because a level remembers the route it took.

Friction gauge Φ 2.00 · complement residual 0 — the gauge identity is checked at every close and published whether or not it holds.

Key statistics

Previous
—
Band
Elevated
21d Range
6486
Percentile
10th
8d Change
−4.4
Volatility
5.3 pts/d
Streak
—
Markets
7
Effective N
6.9
Top Weight
15%
Venues
7 P
Method
v1

Intraday · indicative

130 hourly readings · not the governed close
64.664.865.065.265.465.609-23 00:0009-26 03:0009-29 05:00
Latest
65.19
Since first reading
+0.17
Range
65.0–65.2
Readings
8+122 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

21d published · interactive

21 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. 19 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 = 21d published · dashed = projected · shaded = 80% band
20406080100now62
Projected 14d
62.00
Change
−3.10
80% band
30–94
Confidence
low

Model extrapolation of the published series (robust trend, 21 readings, slope -0.45/day, projection σ 6.8 pts/d widened for a 21-reading sample) — a benchmark projection, not a W.E.T. forecast.

Desk read

W.E.T. analysis — Premium
🔒

Premium

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 — Premium
🔒

Premium

Which markets moved the index, and by how much

Signed contribution per constituent, ranked.

Checking access…

WSAN2 · at a glance

What it is
The same markets naming San Francisco 49ers, 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 san-francisco-football 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 WSAN2 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
[![WSAN2 — WET Index Score](https://www.worldeventtrading.com/api/indices/san-francisco-football-inside-six-months-inverse/badge)](https://www.worldeventtrading.com/indices/san-francisco-football-inside-six-months-inverse)
HTML badge
<a href="https://www.worldeventtrading.com/indices/san-francisco-football-inside-six-months-inverse"><img src="https://www.worldeventtrading.com/api/indices/san-francisco-football-inside-six-months-inverse/badge" alt="WSAN2 — WET Index Score" /></a>
Iframe card
<iframe src="https://www.worldeventtrading.com/embed/indices/san-francisco-football-inside-six-months-inverse" width="340" height="170" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" title="WSAN2 — 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. Inverse San Francisco Football Index 6mo (WSAN2) prints a WET Index Score of 65.1/100 (Elevated), 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.