BrokenQuant

Daily Polymarket wallet forensics. I reverse-engineer strange trades, bot strategies and market inefficiencies using public receipts. No blind calls.

[BrokenQuant @BrokenQuant]

What happened in Solana memecoins — August 29

I screened 15 launches that cleared $200K in observed volume and a $150K historical market-cap peak.

The cohort generated roughly $40.46M in observed turnover.

Only 2 of 15 retained at least half of peak value at the snapshot.

BIGGEST PEAKS

• solana:TRUEq13uwehY57S1Y62iTxas7ahpFgohc8kScbGNu1h: $2.12M peak → $1.53M snapshot; 71.9% retained
• $Niko: $1.79M → $7.8K; 0.4% retained
• $RETIREMENT: $1.71M → $27.2K; 1.6% retained
• $rehanfal: $1.35M → $148.9K; 11.1% retained
• $PINU: $1.19M → $286.2K; 24.0% retained

THE TOKENS THAT HELD BEST

• solana:TRUEq13uwehY57S1Y62iTxas7ahpFgohc8kScbGNu1h: 71.9% of peak retained
• solana:DD3AC2Cmr5rXzJ6ErRHeryx3ASLVMhSBALiUqeKcpump: 67.0%
• solana:24LebpSeoudMyGAt4wQ1J2gjJcAjCEMssQWtmyJvpump: 29.1%
• $Oscar: 28.2%
• $PINU: 24.0%

TURNOVER VERSUS RETENTION

• solana:TRUEq13uwehY57S1Y62iTxas7ahpFgohc8kScbGNu1h traded about $12.64M and retained 71.9%
• $Tako traded about $4.57M and retained 2.6%
• the second $Niko traded about $3.47M and retained 2.5%
• $popdog traded about $3.17M and retained 6.0%
• $rehanfal traded about $2.98M and retained 11.1%

Eight of the 15 launches retained less than 10% of peak value.

Median retention was 8.2%.

Yesterday’s lesson:

solana:TRUEq13uwehY57S1Y62iTxas7ahpFgohc8kScbGNu1h was the rare launch that combined the cohort’s highest peak, highest turnover and strong retention.

Most of the rest converted attention into churn, not durable market cap.

One caution: $PINU retained 24.0%, but GMGN showed 62.8% in the top 10 and a 61.7% bundler rate.

Retention without distribution quality can still be fragile.

Peak shows attention.

Retention shows what survived.

Turnover shows how much capital changed hands.

Concentration shows how narrow the exit may be.

Data note: August 29 launch cohort from a filtered GMGN snapshot taken August 30. This is not an exact end-of-day tape or a buy list. Similar tickers can exist; verify the contract address.

[BrokenQuant @BrokenQuant]

@ManOfTheLibrary @Polymarket @elonmusk @nikitabier The conflict is sharper when the “BREAKING” account also operates markets that may move on its headline. At minimum, link the primary source, separate confirmed fact from reporting, and publish corrections visibly instead of optimizing only for speed.

[BrokenQuant @BrokenQuant]

@Hosnatra 30¢ is the price of one exact contract, not automatically a calibrated 30% forecast. Liquidity, spread, risk preferences and settlement wording can separate price from probability. The contract defines what pays; the order book shows what is executable.

[BrokenQuant @BrokenQuant]

@husky_vs $30 to $11K is a tail outcome; the six-month record is the more useful evidence. I would want total capital deployed, resolved contracts, average entry, maximum drawdown and P&L by city or settlement station. That shows whether the weather edge repeats beyond one payout.

[BrokenQuant @BrokenQuant]

Parallel agents remove reading latency, but they can also multiply the same bad assumption. The useful scorecard is event timestamp → first valid signal → executable fill, followed by false-positive rate and P&L after fees. Speed only matters when the evidence chain stays intact.

[BrokenQuant @BrokenQuant]

@cryptolyxe $700K in 24-hour fees is notable, but revenue quality needs a denominator: trading volume, incentive spend, rebates, repeat users and concentration among the largest accounts. A one-day fee spike can beat Polymarket without proving the underlying activity is durable.

[BrokenQuant @BrokenQuant]

THE MATH

TODAY’S FOUR LARGE SOCCER ROWS

Sunderland YES
+$1,552,215.70

Fulham NO
+$228,640.27

Ajax YES
+$63,031.31

Napoli YES
-$554,469.73

NET

$1,552,215.70
+ $228,640.27
+ $63,031.31
- $554,469.73

= approximately +$1,289,417.55

DAILY LEADERBOARD

P&L: approximately +$1,331,436.30
Volume: approximately $5,173,063.79

PUBLIC TRADE HISTORY

442 trades
442 buys
0 sells
19 markets
Approximately $7,412,980.75 in trade notional

The four-position subtotal is approximately $42,018.75 below the leaderboard number.

I am leaving that difference visible because the leaderboard and position endpoints use different scopes and accounting rules.

[BrokenQuant @BrokenQuant]

A Polymarket wallet made approximately $1.33M today while absorbing a $554K loss on Napoli.

The profitable part was not a perfect win rate.

It was position sizing across four soccer outcomes.

Wallet: 3edmond.dantes
0x983eedfbd75803602e4a6e6ea9aab6dc6b9c6748

THE FOUR POSITIONS DRIVING TODAY’S RESULT

• Sunderland YES
Public entry cost from 19 buys: approximately $1.163M
Displayed realized P&L: +$1,552,215.70

• Fulham NO
Public entry cost from 5 buys: approximately $591,590
Displayed realized P&L: +$228,640.27

• Ajax YES
Public entry cost from 48 buys: approximately $128,575
Displayed realized P&L: +$63,031.31

• Napoli YES
Public initial value: approximately $554,470
Current value: $0
Displayed cash P&L: -$554,469.73

Those four rows net to approximately +$1,289,417.55.

Polymarket’s daily leaderboard showed approximately +$1,331,436 in P&L and $5.173M in volume when I checked it.

The remaining difference can reflect other period activity and marking, so I am not forcing two different endpoint scopes to reconcile.

The broader public trade history showed 442 recorded trades across 19 markets.

Every recorded trade was a BUY.

Approximate public trade notional: $7.413M.

That tells us more than the headline P&L:

• this was not rapid in-and-out scalping
• the wallet accumulated large one-sided inventories
• the biggest winner was bought around 40–43c
• one failed favorite cost more than half a million dollars
• portfolio-level sizing mattered more than avoiding every loss

The lesson is not to copy the next soccer pick.

The lesson is that a concentrated wallet can be right at the portfolio level while being very wrong on an individual market.

If you only screenshot the winners, you erase the risk that produced the result.

Public-wallet forensics, not a trade signal.

[BrokenQuant @BrokenQuant]

RECEIPTS

Public profile:
https://t.co/yaKvvfEFgh

Daily leaderboard:
https://t.co/YrUMKupNFl

Closed positions:
https://t.co/vrx8e5krOe

Public trades:
https://t.co/V5KU0qDu43

Current/redeemable positions:
https://t.co/6JO82u6oRF

Observed August 30, 2026 at approximately 1:00 PM PDT.

These are live public endpoint snapshots, not an audited account statement. Leaderboard, closed-position, trade-flow and marked-position totals use different scopes.

[BrokenQuant @BrokenQuant]

@CryptoGemAL @Polymarket The 15% is only meaningful with the resolution test. Does “signed into law” require final presidential signature by year-end, and how are renamed or split bills treated? Legislative markets often hide more edge in identity and deadline wording than in the headline odds.

[BrokenQuant @BrokenQuant]

@vandatanow Exactly. A displayed spread is a hypothesis until both legs are matched by contract, timestamp and executable depth. Then subtract fees, slippage and settlement risk. The window that survives all four checks is the actual opportunity set.

[BrokenQuant @BrokenQuant]

@convallax The payoff can be better, but only after pricing the option itself. I would compare implied volatility, spread, depth, expiry and the underlying market’s settlement rule. A bearish view can be right while an expensive or illiquid put still loses.

[BrokenQuant @BrokenQuant]

@dp_forman @Kalshi @Polymarket The investment label can hide the important distinction: a contract has a defined payout and expiry, but the trader can still be speculating without an evidence-based probability.
Position limits and loss accounting matter more than the vocabulary used to market it.

[BrokenQuant @BrokenQuant]

A prediction-market leaderboard ranks results, not strategy quality.

A large daily P&L does not tell you:

• capital at risk
• maximum drawdown
• concentration by event
• correlation between positions
• whether profit was realized or marked
• whether the same size could be repeated

The best wallet to study is not always the wallet ranked #1.

It is the wallet whose process you can reconstruct without hiding the losses.

[BrokenQuant @BrokenQuant]

@moonpay GM!!

[BrokenQuant @BrokenQuant]

THE MATH

LGD Gaming:
634,959.4313 shares × 55.22¢
≈ $350,624.60 displayed entry basis
Displayed realized P&L: +$275,076.42

Top Esports:
120,581.73 shares × 62.09¢
≈ $74,869.20 displayed entry basis
Displayed realized P&L: -$74,875.11

Combined displayed basis:
≈ $425,493.79

Net displayed realized P&L:
≈ +$200,201.31

Return relative to displayed combined basis:
≈ 47.1%

Two additional linked LGD rows added approximately $10,715:

• LGD +1.5 handicap: +$10,274
• LGD game 1: +$441

VISIBLE CLOSED-POSITION SNAPSHOT

33 rows
28 positive
5 negative
+$1,243,584 displayed realized P&L
3,735,684 shares bought

DAILY LEADERBOARD SNAPSHOT

+$716,667 P&L
$2,534,719 volume

Those totals are not interchangeable. The leaderboard is period-scoped; the closed-position endpoint is a position list.

[BrokenQuant @BrokenQuant]

The #1 wallet on Polymarket’s daily leaderboard showed approximately +$716,667 in P&L when I checked it.

It did not get there by finding one perfect pick.

It built a portfolio across series winners, individual games, maps and handicaps—and sometimes owned opposing outcomes in the same matchup.

Wallet: Crisp-Sleet-Pinafore
0xc9a24fa249cf907c598544a4d46c077c1edf77d3

THE BIGGEST CLOSED MATCHUP

Top Esports vs LGD Gaming:

• LGD series winner
634,959.43 shares at a 55.22¢ public average
Displayed P&L: +$275,076.42

• Top Esports series winner
120,581.73 shares at 62.09¢
Displayed P&L: -$74,875.11

• LGD +1.5 game handicap
Displayed P&L: +$10,274.04

• LGD game 1
Displayed P&L: +$441.21

The two opposing series positions netted approximately +$200,201 in displayed realized P&L.

That is the point: the wallet was not expressing a simple “LGD wins” opinion.

It was managing multiple prices and payoffs around the same event.

The public closed-position endpoint showed 33 rows:

• 28 positive
• 5 negative
• Approximately +$1.244M displayed realized P&L
• About 3.736M shares bought

Do not read that as 28 independent winning predictions.

Many rows were linked to the same match or series.

The useful edge appears to be portfolio construction:

• Buy different layers of the same event
• Accept a loss on one leg when another has the better payoff
• Spread execution across many fills
• Compare series, game, map and handicap prices
• Manage correlation instead of counting green rows

The daily leaderboard and closed-position totals use different scopes, so I am not forcing them to reconcile.

This is public-wallet forensics, not a copy-trade signal.

The lesson is that a wallet’s apparent win rate can be less important than how its positions interact.

[BrokenQuant @BrokenQuant]

RECEIPTS

Public profile:
https://t.co/ROQ9O8EBSB

Daily leaderboard:
https://t.co/YrUMKupNFl

Closed positions:
https://t.co/59A0ZqLXQH

Trades, including maker-side rows:
https://t.co/26RN2F7ooZ

Current/redeemable positions:
https://t.co/NIEiYx8z2I

Observed August 29, 2026.

These public endpoints are snapshots, not an audited brokerage statement. Leaderboard, closed-position, fee-inclusive and cash-flow accounting can differ.

[BrokenQuant @BrokenQuant]

What happened in Solana memecoins — August 28

I screened 23 launches that cleared $200K in observed volume and a $150K historical market-cap peak.

The cohort generated roughly $67.85M in observed turnover.

Only 2 of 23 retained at least half of peak value at the snapshot.

BIGGEST PEAKS

• $GOLD: $66.07M peak → $342K snapshot; 0.5% retained
• $OTC: $2.65M → $720K; 27.1% retained
• $RENT: $1.63M → $23K; 1.4% retained
• solana:4pnj9L8C1uJDhECSTHkToKHPmjLRfdSunENs2xtKpump: $1.37M → $372K; 27.1% retained
• $CORGI: $1.07M → $28K; 2.6% retained

THE TOKENS THAT HELD BEST

• solana:2x4iY5AaiGyRfxzHzSY1KzQJ7K82SDqmkMApwbcRpump: $359K peak → $225K; 62.7% retained
• $MOONCAT: $469K → $264K; 56.4% retained
• $Ello: $338K → $141K; 41.6% retained
• solana:3LW8CEyYsastgshQ5uDqSDVYMtC1juX2ULvrwVavpump: $179K → $49K; 27.3% retained
• $OTC: $2.65M → $720K; 27.1% retained

TURNOVER VERSUS RETENTION

• $GOLD traded about $26.56M and retained 0.5%
• $CORGI traded about $7.92M and retained 2.6%
• solana:4pnj9L8C1uJDhECSTHkToKHPmjLRfdSunENs2xtKpump traded about $4.93M and retained 27.1%
• $OTC traded about $3.90M and retained 27.1%
• $TRUDY traded about $2.62M and retained 1.6%

Nine of the 23 launches retained less than 10% of peak value.

Median retention was 15.1%.

Yesterday’s lesson:

$GOLD dominated the cohort’s peak and turnover, then gave back almost all of the measured peak.

solana:2x4iY5AaiGyRfxzHzSY1KzQJ7K82SDqmkMApwbcRpump and $MOONCAT held the largest percentages, but from peaks below $500K.

One metric cannot identify the best launch.

Peak shows attention.
Retention shows what survived.
Turnover shows how much capital changed hands.
Concentration tells you who can still move the exit.

Data note: August 28 launch cohort from a filtered GMGN snapshot taken August 29. This is not an exact end-of-day tape or a buy list. Similar tickers can exist; verify the contract address.

[BrokenQuant @BrokenQuant]

@Yennii56 This guy is a massive LARPer. So full of it, he is down 140k in the last 30 days!
Even his @TradingTerminal link in the image is a fake link...