Readings may not describe today1 scheduled close did not landWhy →
1 behind

1 scheduled close did not land — the daily index publish was due at 10:37 UTC on 2026-09-10 and the newest print on file is still 2026-09-09. 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

WSCOR

W.E.T. Score Tech Science Index 6mo

v1StandingExperimentalStanding
Governed close level
1061.8168
base 1000 · chained · since 2026-08-14
Gauge
26.65
0–100 · rung 6
Divisor
2.5098e-4
what chains this level to the last
Closes
18
latest 2026-09-09
The opposing reading

score-tech-science-inside-six-months-inverse reads 73.35 against this index’s 26.65. Same markets, opposite side.

Coverage
68 of 68 admitted markets pricedκ 1.0000 · floor 0.95weights two-sided-depth · cap 15.0%
Withheld by the sentinel

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

What would make this reading wrong
  • The "score" axis stops appearing in tech-science 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 (7)
  • universe: resolved by universe/v1 over 11653 candidate canonical event(s) from the `tape-text` source (${m.title ?? ''} ${m.marketRef}), admitting 74. Rejections by reason: keyword-miss 11119, category-not-admitted 450, 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: 11119 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: 6 of 74 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: spread-too-wide 3, price-above-ceiling 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 `threshold` framing axis (§3.3) was re-read on this tape and took force on the `up` case by rule `member-majority`, framing 63 of 68 members and holding 0 of them NO. 63 of 63 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 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: 69 prior member(s), of which 3 could not be priced today and left through the DIVISOR (0 at a venue-reported resolution, 3 at their last governed mark, 0 unpriced on both dates). Price relative 1.001080231 against a gauge basis of 0.266498654; the divisor moved to absorb the composition and weight change, so what the level published is the price move and nothing else.
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 5c2348b80251f6a6 · methodology 98806b619350ff13 · closed by standing/v1 · lifecycle experimental · class standing

26.65Stale · 1 close behindLow & cooling, volatile

As of Sep 9, 2026 · last moved Sep 9, 2026 · scale 0–100 (Low supportHigh support)

68 tech-science markets carrying the "score" axis across polymarket, every one resolving inside six months, tracked as one composition.

Basket level · official print60 held · close 2026-09-10
1189.92+18.99%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
1189.92
Since inception
+18.99%
Cost to cross
Holdings marked
98.3% of 60
1 day
+3.18%
7 day
+10.74%
Markets held
60
Settled
0
Rebalanced out
0
Hit rate
Cash
42.0%
Inception
2026-08-18
Weighting
Equal notional
Marks
Two-sided mid
Days tracked
20

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 · 60 markets

held since 2026-08-18 · the reading above is computed over today's roster, which differs
MarketNowReturn
  • Will the next Claude Opus model debut at a score of at least 1520 by December 31, 2026?polymarket · YES · entry 10c18c+84.2%
  • Will the highest score achieved on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 80% or higher?polymarket · YES · entry 8c7c−12.5%
  • Will any AI model reach a Chatbot Arena score of at least 1600 by December 31?polymarket · YES · entry 10c5c−55.0%
  • Will the highest score achieved by an OpenAI model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 70% or higher?polymarket · YES · entry 6c7c+27.3%
  • Will any AI model reach a Chatbot Arena score of at least 1650 by December 31?polymarket · YES · entry 8c5c−40.0%
  • Will any AI model reach a Chatbot Arena score of at least 1700 by December 31?polymarket · YES · entry 3c3c+17.2%
  • Will the next Claude Opus model debut at a score of at least 1515 by December 31, 2026?polymarket · YES · entry 28c27c−3.6%
  • Will the highest score achieved by an Anthropic Claude model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 75% or higher?polymarket · YES · entry 5c4c−15.0%
  • Will the highest score achieved by an Anthropic Claude model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 55% or higher?polymarket · YES · entry 87c89c+2.3%
  • Will the highest score achieved by an Anthropic Claude model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 70% or higher?polymarket · YES · entry 9c7c−23.5%
  • Will any AI model reach 1600 Coding Arena Score by December 31, 2026?polymarket · YES · entry 14c13c−5.5%
  • Will any AI model reach 1560 Coding Arena Score by December 31, 2026?polymarket · YES · entry 44c1.0¢ spread · 490/1.0k within 5¢36c−18.4%
  • Will the highest score achieved by a Google Gemini model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 70% or higher?polymarket · YES · entry 8c4c−51.2%
  • Will the highest score achieved by a Moonshot Kimi model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 65% or higher?polymarket · YES · entry 5c8c+53.8%
  • Will the highest score achieved by a Moonshot Kimi model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 45% or higher?polymarket · YES · entry 95c87c−7.7%
  • Will the highest score achieved by an OpenAI model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 65% or higher?polymarket · YES · entry 9c22c+138.9%
  • Will any LLM score at least 80% on Humanity's Last Exam before Dec 31, 2026?kalshi · YES · entry 10c46c+384.2%
  • Will any AI model reach a Chatbot Arena score of at least 1530 by December 31?polymarket · YES · entry 27c40c+49.1%
  • Will any AI model reach 1580 Coding Arena Score by December 31, 2026?polymarket · YES · entry 21c25c+19.0%
  • Will any LLM score at least 50% on Humanity's Last Exam before Dec 31, 2026?kalshi · YES · entry 98c99c+1.0%
  • Will any LLM score at least 65% on Humanity's Last Exam before Dec 31, 2026?kalshi · YES · entry 36c50c+40.8%
  • Will the highest score achieved on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 70% or higher?polymarket · YES · entry 16c16c−3.1%
  • Will the highest score achieved by an Anthropic Claude model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 65% or higher?polymarket · YES · entry 16c20c+25.8%
  • Will the next Grok model (4.6+) debut with a Humanity’s Last Exam score of 45% or higher?polymarket · YES · entry 12c44c+262.5%
  • Will the next Google Gemini Pro model debut with a Humanity’s Last Exam score of 50% or higher?polymarket · YES · entry 71c73c+2.8%
  • Will any LLM score at least 75% on Humanity's Last Exam before Dec 31, 2026?kalshi · YES · entry 15c44c+190.0%
  • Will the highest score achieved on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 65% or higher?polymarket · YES · entry 27c29c+9.4%
  • Will the highest score achieved on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 75% or higher?polymarket · YES · entry 9c13c+47.1%
  • Will any LLM score at least 55% on Humanity's Last Exam before Dec 31, 2026?kalshi · YES · entry 93c97c+4.3%
  • Will any LLM score at least 70% on Humanity's Last Exam before Dec 31, 2026?kalshi · YES · entry 26c45c+71.2%
  • Will any LLM score at least 60% on Humanity's Last Exam before Dec 31, 2026?kalshi · YES · entry 64c61c−4.7%
  • Will any LLM score at least 85% on Humanity's Last Exam before Dec 31, 2026?kalshi · YES · entry 7c52c+642.9%
  • Will any LLM score at least 90% on Humanity's Last Exam before Dec 31, 2026?kalshi · YES · entry 5c14c+180.0%
  • Will the highest score achieved by a Google Gemini model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 50% or higher?polymarket · YES · entry 73c82c+12.3%
  • Will the highest score achieved by an OpenAI model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 55% or higher?polymarket · YES · entry 55c85c+55.0%
  • Will the highest score achieved on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 90% or higher?polymarket · YES · entry 6c5c−12.9%
  • Will the highest score achieved by an OpenAI model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 60% or higher?polymarket · YES · entry 35c44c+26.1%
  • Will the highest score achieved by a SpaceXAI Grok model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 45% or higher?polymarket · YES · entry 70c90c+28.1%
  • Will any AI model reach a Chatbot Arena score of at least 1540 by December 31?polymarket · YES · entry 17c20c+15.0%
  • Will any AI model reach a Chatbot Arena score of at least 1550 by December 31?polymarket · YES · entry 11c12c+4.5%
  • Will the highest score achieved by a Moonshot Kimi model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 50% or higher?polymarket · YES · entry 38c51c+34.7%
  • Will the next Claude Opus model debut at a score of at least 1510 by December 31, 2026?polymarket · YES · entry 40c41c+2.5%
  • Will the highest score achieved by a Meta model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 70% or higher?polymarket · YES · entry 6c6c−1.7%
  • Will the next Claude Opus model debut at a score of at least 1500 by December 31, 2026?polymarket · YES · entry 71c64c−10.6%
  • Will the highest score achieved by a Meta model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 55% or higher?polymarket · YES · entry 44c44c−1.1%
  • Will the next Google Gemini Pro model debut with a Humanity’s Last Exam score of 45% or higher?polymarket · YES · entry 88c81c−8.0%
  • Will any AI model reach 1575 Math Arena Score by December 31, 2026?polymarket · YES · entry 82c1.0¢ spread · 883/737 within 5¢74c−10.4%
  • Will the next Claude Opus model debut at a score of at least 1505 by December 31, 2026?polymarket · YES · entry 68c62c−8.1%
  • Will the next Google Gemini Pro model debut with a Humanity’s Last Exam score of 40% or higher?polymarket · YES · entry 91c89c−2.7%
  • Will the next Grok model (4.6+) debut with a Humanity’s Last Exam score of 50% or higher?polymarket · YES · entry 6c9c+57.3%

Showing the 50 heaviest of 60 constituents by weight. See the full book →

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
+31.95index 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 2031.95 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 1.60 · complement residual 0 — the gauge identity is checked at every close and published whether or not it holds.

Key statistics

Previous
Band
Low
18d Range
2742
Percentile
6th
10d Change
4.8
Volatility
4.6 pts/d
Streak
Markets
68
Effective N
28.0
Top Weight
12%
Venues
68 P
Method
v1

Indicative tape · 7 sessions

150 hourly readings since 2026-09-04 · not the governed close
26.027.028.029.030.031.009-04 00:0009-07 06:0009-10 12:00
Latest
26.49
Since 2026-09-04
1.77
Range
25.730.6
Readings
103+47 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

18d published · interactive

18 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. 9 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 = 18d published · dashed = projected · shaded = 80% band
0102030405060now27
Projected 14d
26.80
Change
+0.20
80% band
056
Confidence
low

Model extrapolation of the published series (robust trend, 18 readings, slope +0.03/day, projection σ 6.1 pts/d widened for a 18-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…

Contribution by category

weight share of today's value
tech-science100% · 68

Constituents by weight

all 68 · what today's reading was computed over (2026-09-09) · the basket below holds a different set
Show the remaining 48 holdings

WSCOR · at a glance

What it is
68 tech-science markets carrying the "score" axis across polymarket, every one resolving inside six months, tracked as one composition.
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 score 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 WSCOR reading on your own site, README, or newsletter.

Badge · works anywhere images do

WET Index Score badge preview

Card · iframe for articles & dashboards

Markdown badge
[![WSCOR — WET Index Score](https://www.worldeventtrading.com/api/indices/score-tech-science-inside-six-months/badge)](https://www.worldeventtrading.com/indices/score-tech-science-inside-six-months)
HTML badge
<a href="https://www.worldeventtrading.com/indices/score-tech-science-inside-six-months"><img src="https://www.worldeventtrading.com/api/indices/score-tech-science-inside-six-months/badge" alt="WSCOR — WET Index Score" /></a>
Iframe card
<iframe src="https://www.worldeventtrading.com/embed/indices/score-tech-science-inside-six-months" width="340" height="170" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" title="WSCOR — WET Index Score" loading="lazy"></iframe>

Quote this index

free to cite with attribution + the as-of date
“As of Sep 9, 2026, the W.E.T. Score Tech Science Index 6mo (WSCOR) prints a WET Index Score of 26.6/100 (Low), 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.