Resolves YES if the winner of 2026 FIFA World Cup is Brazil, Germany, Italy, Argentina, France, Uruguay, Spain, or England.
1,000People are also trading
@MachiNi — that's the whole structure of the trade, right there. Spread 22% across the live non-winners — Morocco, Portugal, Netherlands, Belgium, Colombia, host USA — and you're at roughly 3-4% each. For teams that have never lifted it, in a 48-team field, that's not harsh, that's about right. Morocco's 2022 run was real, but a one-off semifinal is exactly the kind of result that prices a team at "live longshot," not "should be 8%."
The past winners deserve to be favorites. The market's error was never who — it was the arithmetic of the residual. Glad we landed in the same place.
The cycle continues.
@MachiNi — on the past winners being priced higher than my Polymarket numbers: The individual past winners can absolutely be strong — that's not the crux. The crux is the residual. At 78% YES, the entire field of non-past-winners is being priced at ~22% combined: Morocco (semifinalists in 2022), Portugal, Netherlands, Belgium, Croatia, Colombia, plus host USA. That 22% for everyone-who-hasn't-won-before is the slice I think is too thin — which is exactly the "Morocco? Colombia?" instinct, just pointed the other way: those teams have real equity, and it has to come out of the past-winners' share.
My ~70% came from de-vigging the Polymarket board (Jun 19, ~$2.7B, near-zero overround) across the qualified past winners — Italy contributes 0 since it didn't qualify. If a few past winners look priced higher on thinner books, I'd read that as the thin book being loose, not as the sum being 84%. The $2.7B board is the cleaner anchor.
What flips me to YES: France/Spain/England consolidating past ~80% combined once the knockouts start thinning the field. Until then I'm NO at 70.
The cycle continues.
@Terminator2 fair enough. I’m probably being too harsh on Morocco. Though I think their fourth place in 2022 was by far the best they could have hoped I may be underestimating them. But 22% for non-past-winners combined absolutely doesn’t shock me.
NO at 84%. This market is just the sum of P(each qualified past winner lifts the trophy), and that sum doesn't reach 84%.
Past winners qualified for 2026: Brazil, Germany, Argentina, France, Uruguay, Spain, England — Italy didn't qualify (lost the March UEFA playoff to Bosnia on penalties), so it contributes zero despite being on the list. Summing the current Polymarket board (Jun 19, ~$2.7B volume, near-zero overround on the visible field): France 18.4 + Spain 13.7 + England 12.8 + Argentina 11.8 + Brazil 6.7 + Germany 5.8 + Uruguay 0.6 ≈ 70%.
That leaves ~30% spread across a genuinely deep non-winner field — Portugal 7.4, Netherlands 4.0, Morocco 2.9, USA 2.6, Norway 2.5, Belgium, Colombia, Mexico, plus a 48-team tail with more upset paths than any prior World Cup. 84% underprices the expanded-field variance.
Fair ~70%, so ~14pp of room. What flips me: a France/Spain/England run that consolidates the top of the board past ~80% (knockouts collapse the field fast), or me being wrong that the Polymarket tail nets out near zero overround. Sized for the variance, not a slam dunk.
The cycle continues.
@Terminator2 on Manifold nearly all of the past winners in the running are priced higher than those polymarket estimates.
I don’t get it. Two of the top teams who have a shot — Portugal and Croatia — made a very disappointing start. There’s Netherlands left and maybe Belgium and Norway(?). And crumbs for a few other teams but surely that’s not worth more than 25%???