Readings may not describe today48 scheduled closes did not landWhy →Hide
48 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. Seats Elections Index 2w
v1StandingExperimentalWeeklyThe §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.
32 input(s) were quarantined by sentinel/v1 before this close and are excluded from the reading above.
- The "seats" axis stops appearing in elections 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 9, severity frames 0 of 9, threshold frames 1 of 9), 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 (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 12. Rejections by reason: keyword-miss 9230, category-not-admitted 89, horizon-unknown 12, horizon-outside-window 60. - universe: the declared 3–17d horizon window (axis 8) was APPLIED and removed 60 event(s) that every other selector admitted, plus 12 whose resolution date this source does not carry. A member resolving outside the window this index publishes is not a member of this index's horizon, whatever else it is.
- universe: 9230 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: 10 of 12 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 9, price-above-ceiling 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 2 members and holding 0 of them NO. The declared threshold axis frames 0 of 2 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 2026-09-07, 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 e57790b449928dba · methodology 1c20ad2ae330cee2 · 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: 49.64 on 2026-09-21. It is not carried forward.
11 elections markets carrying the "seats" axis across polymarket, every one resolving inside two weeks, tracked as one composition.
No return published — not one of this basket's 12 open holdings carried a mark on 2026-11-05. The level would read exactly 1000 and the return exactly 0.00%, which is what an unmoved basket and an unobserved one look like from outside. They are not the same thing, so this one says which it is.
hypothetical · mid marks · before fees, spread and slippage
Basket performance
hypothetical · mid marks · before fees, spread and slippage- Basket total return
- —
- Since inception
- —
- Cost to cross
- —
- Holdings marked
- 0.0% of 12
- 1 day
- —
- 7 day
- —
- Markets held
- 12
- Settled
- 1
- Rebalanced out
- 0
- Hit rate
- —
- Cash
- 62.2%
- Inception
- 2026-09-07
- Weighting
- Equal notional
- Marks
- Two-sided mid
- Days tracked
- 37
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 · 12 markets
held since 2026-09-07 · the reading above is computed over today's roster, which differs- Will United Russia win fewer than 280 seats in the next Russian State Duma election?polymarket · YES · entry 4c27 sessions stalepolymarketYES4c2c−32.9%15.0%Polymarket ↗
- Will New People (NL) win the second-most seats in the next Russian parliamentary election?polymarket · YES · entry 5c27 sessions stalepolymarketYES5c4c−6.5%15.0%Polymarket ↗
- Will the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia (LDPR) win the second-most seats in the next Russian parliamentary election?polymarket · YES · entry 7c27 sessions stalepolymarketYES7c4c−38.5%15.0%Polymarket ↗
- Will United Russia win between 325 and 339 seats in the next Russian State Duma election?polymarket · YES · entry 37c27 sessions stalepolymarketYES37c44c+19.2%11.8%Polymarket ↗
- Will United Russia win 355 or more seats in the next Russian State Duma election?polymarket · YES · entry 8c27 sessions stalepolymarketYES8c6c−26.0%11.6%Polymarket ↗
- Will United Russia win between 340 and 354 seats in the next Russian State Duma election?polymarket · YES · entry 22c27 sessions stalepolymarketYES22c24c+9.3%6.6%Polymarket ↗
- Will United Russia win between 295 and 309 seats in the next Russian State Duma election?polymarket · YES · entry 5c27 sessions stalepolymarketYES5c6c+30.0%3.8%Polymarket ↗
- Will New People (NL) win the third-most seats in the next Russian parliamentary election?polymarket · YES · entry 43c27 sessions stalepolymarketYES43c35c−18.8%3.2%Polymarket ↗
- Will the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (KPRF) win the second-most seats in the next Russian parliamentary election?polymarket · YES · entry 90c27 sessions stalepolymarketYES90c93c+3.4%2.2%Polymarket ↗
- Will United Russia win between 310 and 324 seats in the next Russian State Duma election?polymarket · YES · entry 27c27 sessions stalepolymarketYES27c18c−32.5%1.9%Polymarket ↗
- Will the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (KPRF) win the third-most seats in the next Russian parliamentary election?polymarket · YES · entry 11c27 sessions stalepolymarketYES11c7c−33.3%1.6%Polymarket ↗
- Will the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia (LDPR) win the third-most seats in the next Russian parliamentary election?polymarket · YES · entry 46c27 sessions stalepolymarketYES46c58c+26.1%0.8%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 setWSEA2 · at a glance
- What it is
- 11 elections markets carrying the "seats" axis across polymarket, every one resolving inside two weeks, 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 seats is being priced across venues on a composition of at least 6 markets resolving inside 17 days.
Embed this score
always the latest published reading, dated · attribution built inPut the live WSEA2 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/seats-elections-inside-two-weeks)<a href="https://www.worldeventtrading.com/indices/seats-elections-inside-two-weeks"><img src="https://www.worldeventtrading.com/api/indices/seats-elections-inside-two-weeks/badge" alt="WSEA2 — WET Index Score" /></a><iframe src="https://www.worldeventtrading.com/embed/indices/seats-elections-inside-two-weeks" width="340" height="170" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" title="WSEA2 — WET Index Score" loading="lazy"></iframe>Quote this index
free to cite with attribution + the as-of date“The W.E.T. Seats Elections Index 2w (WSEA2) 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.