Index of the Week
Every Monday the desk cultivates one index from the live cross-venue board and publishes it here with the reasoning that produced it — and, beside it, the recognition of how the previous week's index actually did. The recognition is written whether the week went well or badly; a ritual that only publishes its wins is marketing, and the only thing worth building here is a record.
The weekly index is always a slate, never a benchmark. A benchmark carries versioned methodology and a 14-day consultation window before any rule change, so one cannot be minted weekly without destroying what makes that class dependable. See the index board for both classes.
This week — released August 31, 2026
rank #1 of 498Race — Elections, inside two years
20 elections markets carrying the "race" axis across kalshi, every one resolving inside two years, tracked as one composition.
Inception locked August 27, 2026. Every member's entry price was struck once, at go-live, and is never recomputed.
Members
each trades individually on its own venue- YESWill Democratics win the Senate race in North Carolina? — Roy Cooperkalshi
- YESWill Republicans win the Senate race in Iowa? — Ashley Hinsonkalshi
- YESWill Democratics win the Senate race in South Carolina? — Annie Andrewskalshi
- YESWill Republican win the House race for OH-07? — Max Millerkalshi
- YESWill Democratics win the Senate race in New Hampshire? — Democratic partykalshi
- YESWill Democratic win the House race for FL-22? — Pia Dandiyakalshi
- YESWill Democratic win the House race for AL-02? — Shomari Figureskalshi
- YESWill Republican win the House race for MN-01? — Brad Finstadkalshi
- YESWill Republican win the House race for TX-23? — Brandon Herrerakalshi
- YESWill Republican win the House race for LA-06? — Republican partykalshi
- YESWill Republican win the House race for FL-24? — Mayonna Te Brownkalshi
- YESWill Democratic win the House race for VA-06? — Beth Macykalshi
- YESWill Democratic win the House race for TX-07? — Lizzie Fletcherkalshi
- YESWill Republican win the House race for SC-06? — John Petersonkalshi
- YESWill Republican win the House race for WA-04? — Amanda McKinneykalshi
- YESWill Republican win the House race for VA-05? — John McGuirekalshi
- YESWill Republican win the House race for NY-21? — Anthony Constantinokalshi
- YESWill Republican win the House race for MS-02? — Ron Ellerkalshi
- YESWill Democratic win the House race for KY-04? — Melissa Claire Strangekalshi
- YESWill Democratic win the House race for WI-06? — Brad Smithkalshi
The panel
fixed, published weightsSeveral specialist scorers, each with one narrow published lens, combined by a gate that weights them and filtered by a judge. It is a mixture-of-experts pattern, not a neural one, and nothing here learns yet — the gate weights are fixed and published, and become adaptive only once the accuracy scorecard carries enough graded outcomes to justify it.
| Lens | Weight | Score |
|---|---|---|
| Catalyst All 20 dated members resolve between 2027-11-03 and 2027-11-03 — a 0-day window a median 437 days out. No member parses into a subject this engine can name, so what is measured here is a shared RESOLUTION WINDOW and not a shared catalyst — venues write annual contracts onto one expiry, and a date span alone cannot tell that calendar artefact apart from a single dated event. The reading is held at 0.5 until 50% of the composition shares a subject. | 0.29 | 0.50 |
| Liquidity 20 of 20 members clear the 250-unit volume floor and the basket's median volume is 30680, giving a depth factor of 1. | 0.21 | 1.00 |
| Novelty Closest published index is WMID (W.E.T. Midterm Control Index, slate) at 4% overlap by thematic vocabulary overlap, measured across all 33 published indices. | 0.21 | 0.96 |
| Coherence 20 of 20 members sit in `elections` and 100% share the term "race" — the basket names itself. | 0.29 | 1.00 |
| Divergence abstained: None of the 20 members parses into a structural claim, so no cross-venue comparison was attempted. identity.ts recognises price thresholds, price ranges and rate decisions and deliberately refuses everything else; a score of 0 here would report venue agreement that was never tested. | — | — |
| Calibration abstained: 0 graded outcomes match this composition's market family, against a floor of 30. The whole graded set is 237 observations and 3 of its 10 decile buckets clear the 30-outcome bar, so there is no calibration signal to report here — pooled or per family. This lens abstains rather than manufacturing one from a handful of points. | — | — |
Passed over ahead of this one
- #1 primary-elections-inside-two-weeks — candidate-stale-vintage — cultivated 2026-08-04, this folder's newest run is 2026-08-23
- #1 bank-economics-inside-six-months — candidate-stale-vintage — cultivated 2026-08-12, this folder's newest run is 2026-08-23
- #1 nominee-elections-inside-two-weeks — candidate-stale-vintage — cultivated 2026-08-13, this folder's newest run is 2026-08-23
- #1 race-elections-inside-six-months — candidate-stale-vintage — cultivated 2026-08-14, this folder's newest run is 2026-08-23
The refusals are published because they are the evidence the method is doing work. A ranked list nobody can interrogate is an oracle, not a method.
Last week — released August 24, 2026
recognised 2026-08-31Race — Elections, inside two years
hypothetical · mid marks · before fees, spread and slippage
Race — Elections, inside two years scored +0.50% over 4 days, marked 2026-08-31 — hypothetical · mid marks · before fees, spread and slippage.
Composition: 19 members, 0 graded at the venue, 0 voided and removed from the basket, 0 unmarkable and excluded. Members that could not be marked are never marked to zero.
Largest positive contributions — Will Republican win the House race for OH-07? — Max Miller (YES) repriced 17.0% → 20.5%, +1.08pp of the score; Will Republican win the House race for MS-02? — Ron Eller (YES) repriced 5.3% → 6.3%, +0.94pp of the score; Will Democratics win the Senate race in South Carolina? — Annie Andrews (YES) repriced 12.5% → 13.5%, +0.42pp of the score; Will Democratic win the House race for FL-22? — Pia Dandiya (YES) repriced 39.5% → 41.5%, +0.27pp of the score.
Largest negative contributions — Will Democratic win the House race for WI-06? — Brad Smith (YES) repriced 7.1% → 4.5%, −1.89pp of the score; Will Democratic win the House race for KY-04? — Melissa Claire Strange (YES) repriced 5.5% → 5.3%, −0.24pp of the score; Will Democratics win the Senate race in New Hampshire? — Democratic party (YES) repriced 85.5% → 83.5%, −0.12pp of the score; Will Republican win the House race for MN-01? — Brad Finstad (YES) repriced 72.5% → 71.0%, −0.11pp of the score.
7 of 19 scored members moved with the composition; member returns ranged −35.92% to +20.59%.
These are the contracts that repriced. W.E.T. records prices, not reasons: no explanation of why any market moved is offered here, and none should be inferred from the ordering.
The sample is one scored week. That is below the 12-week minimum, so no rate and no average are published — every week is listed individually instead.
What moved
contributions sum to the score exactlyPositive contributions
Will Republican win the House race for OH-07? — Max Miller
YES17.0% → 20.5%+20.59%+1.08pp of the scoreWill Republican win the House race for MS-02? — Ron Eller
YES5.3% → 6.3%+17.76%+0.94pp of the scoreWill Democratics win the Senate race in South Carolina? — Annie Andrews
YES12.5% → 13.5%+8.00%+0.42pp of the scoreWill Democratic win the House race for FL-22? — Pia Dandiya
YES39.5% → 41.5%+5.06%+0.27pp of the score
Negative contributions
Will Democratic win the House race for WI-06? — Brad Smith
YES7.1% → 4.5%−35.92%−1.89pp of the scoreWill Democratic win the House race for KY-04? — Melissa Claire Strange
YES5.5% → 5.3%−4.55%−0.24pp of the scoreWill Democratics win the Senate race in New Hampshire? — Democratic party
YES85.5% → 83.5%−2.34%−0.12pp of the scoreWill Republican win the House race for MN-01? — Brad Finstad
YES72.5% → 71.0%−2.07%−0.11pp of the score
The panel’s report card
what the method got right, and what cannot be graded- CatalystNot gradable
Claimed: All 20 dated members resolve between 2027-11-03 and 2027-11-03 — a 0-day window a median 437 days out. No member parses into a subject this engine can name, so what is measured here is a shared RESOLUTION WINDOW and not a shared catalyst — venues write annual contracts onto one expiry, and a date span alone cannot tell that calendar artefact apart from a single dated event. The reading is held at 0.5 until 50% of the composition shares a subject.
The price tape records no observation that settles this lens. Grading it would mean asserting something the engine did not measure, so it is left ungraded.
- LiquiditySupported
Claimed: every member would stay continuously markable for the whole window.
19 of 19 non-void members carried a usable mark (100% coverage; the score floor is 60%). 0 member(s) could not be marked and were excluded rather than marked to zero.
- NoveltyNot gradable
Claimed: Closest published index is WMID (W.E.T. Midterm Control Index, slate) at 4% overlap by thematic vocabulary overlap, measured across all 33 published indices.
The price tape records no observation that settles this lens. Grading it would mean asserting something the engine did not measure, so it is left ungraded.
- CoherenceNot supported
Claimed: these markets move as one read rather than as unrelated contracts.
7 of 19 scored members moved in the same direction as the composition (37%); individual returns ranged −35.92% to +20.59%.
- DivergenceNot gradable
Claimed: abstained: None of the 20 members parses into a structural claim, so no cross-venue comparison was attempted. identity.ts recognises price thresholds, price ranges and rate decisions and deliberately refuses everything else; a score of 0 here would report venue agreement that was never tested.
The price tape records no observation that settles this lens. Grading it would mean asserting something the engine did not measure, so it is left ungraded.
- CalibrationNot gradable
Claimed: the selected questions carried well-calibrated venue prices at the lock.
No member has graded, so there is no outcome to score prices against.
Half the panel is marked not gradable on purpose. Whether a catalyst landed, whether a cross-venue divergence was the one that mattered — those are claims about the world, and this engine records prices. Marking them anyway would be inventing the grade.
The cultivation record
4 of 5 released week(s) — 1 not in this record| Week | Index | Score |
|---|---|---|
| 2026-08-24 | Race — Elections, inside two years | +0.50% |
| 2026-08-10 | Primary — Elections, inside two weeks | unscored |
| 2026-08-03 | Seat — Elections, inside six months | unscored |
| 2026-08-03 | Seat — Elections, inside six months | unscored |
The sample is one scored week. That is below the 12-week minimum, so no rate and no average are published — every week is listed individually instead.
How to read this
The score is the percentage move of an equal-weight composition, marked at two-sided mid prices and oriented to each member's declared side. It is size-blind by construction — identical whether a reader follows it with a little or a lot — which is what makes one week comparable to every other week, and what keeps it from being a profit-and-loss figure. There are no currency amounts on this page and no field that could carry one.
A member that stops quoting is never marked to zero — it is excluded and the coverage figure says so. A member the venue voided is not a loss: the question was never graded, so it leaves the basket. Below a 60% coverage floor no score is published at all, because an index scored on the half of its members that stayed quotable is a different index.
W.E.T. is not an exchange and accepts no orders. Every member trades individually on its own venue, this combination is a published view rather than an offered instrument, and nothing here is advice. hypothetical · mid marks · before fees, spread and slippage.