Iran War: Suspicious Bets & Insider Trading Claims Rock Markets
Trading activity spiked across cryptocurrency platforms, oil futures, and the United States stock market in the hours before former President Donald Trump announced a delay in potential attacks on Iranian energy infrastructure, raising questions about possible insider knowledge of the impending decision.
The most prominent example of potentially illicit activity centers on Polymarket, a cryptocurrency-based platform allowing anonymous betting on future events. Researchers have identified dozens of new accounts placing large, accurate bets just before critical events, including the February 28 US-Israeli strikes that initiated the current escalation with Iran. As of Wednesday, Polymarket hosted 355 live prediction markets related to the conflict, ranging from the identity of Iran’s next leader to the timing of a potential US-Iran nuclear deal and the likelihood of Iranian military action against Israel.
Andrew 10 GWEI, an independent on-chain analyst, told Al Jazeera he discovered 38 accounts believed to be operated by a single individual who profited by more than $2 million from correctly predicting the February 28 strikes. According to research shared on X, each account placed between four and ten bets with a near-perfect success rate. The user began establishing the accounts with cryptocurrency transfers on February 22, and placed bets between 11:00 and 12:00 GMT on February 27, anticipating the strikes.
Experts identify several “red flags” indicative of suspicious betting activity. These include “wallet splitting”—dividing bets across multiple accounts to evade detection—and creating new wallets specifically for placing bets, according to Ben Yorke, founder of Starchild, a platform for developing AI agents, and a former research analyst at Cointelegraph Consulting. “The most important aspect of a suspicious wallet would be a wallet with no history before,” Yorke told Al Jazeera. “An average user of Polymarket will have a long history, but if you’re doing insider trading, you wouldn’t wish that link, so you would create a fresh wallet.”
Polymarket History, an account on X, recently identified a group of newly created accounts that collectively wagered $2 million on three predictions: no Iran ceasefire by March 31, no US forces entering Iran by March 31, and US forces entering Iran by April 30.
Similar unusual trading patterns were observed in traditional financial markets. In the 15 minutes before Trump’s 7:04 am GMT announcement on Truth Social regarding “VERY GOOD AND PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATIONS” with Tehran, trading volume surged, with 6,200 Brent crude and West Texas Intermediate oil contracts—valued at $580 million—changing hands, according to Bloomberg data. The price of Brent crude subsequently fell from $112 to $99 a barrel, while West Texas Intermediate dropped from $99 to $86, generating substantial profits for those who had bet on a price decline.
Simultaneously, pretrading volume on the S&. P 500 e-Mini futures contract, traded on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, also spiked around 6:50 am GMT. Unusual Whales, a platform tracking activity by large investors, reported a trade involving the purchase of S&P 500 futures with a notational value of $1.5 billion and the simultaneous sale of oil futures valued at $192 million. “These orders were 4-6x larger than anything else at the time. The trader seemingly made huge gains,” Unusual Whales wrote on X.
Spikes were also reported in other futures markets, including the DAX Index Futures, Euro Stoxx 50 Index, Nasdaq, and Russell 2000 Indexes, according to Bloomberg.
Independent commodities trader Peter Brandt told Al Jazeera he found the timing of the trades suspicious, noting a pattern of similar activity surrounding other recent “market-shaking announcements.” He cautioned, still, that such trades were likely legal, as US law does not currently prohibit insider trading of futures contracts for oil and the S&P 500.
US economist and Nobel laureate Paul Krugman offered a more critical assessment, writing on Substack that the trades had an “obvious explanation.” “Somebody close to Trump knew what he was about to do, and exploited that inside information to develop huge, instant profits,” he wrote, arguing that the activity amounted to more than simple insider trading. “We have another word for situations in which people with access to confidential information regarding national security – such as plans to bomb or not to bomb another country – exploit that information for profit. That word is ‘treason’,” he wrote.
The White House did not immediately respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment, but a spokesperson told the Financial Times that the administration does not “tolerate any administration official illegally profiteering off of insider knowledge” and dismissed accusations of insider trading as “baseless and irresponsible reporting.”
Amid growing scrutiny, Polymarket updated its rules on Monday to prohibit trading based on stolen confidential information, illegal tips, or influence over an outcome. Kalshi, which requires user identification, announced it was implementing “new technological guardrails” to prevent politicians, athletes, and other potentially informed individuals from trading in specific markets.
Democratic Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez criticized these changes on Tuesday, stating on X that they were insufficient, arguing that numerous individuals—including staff, advisors, consultants, and spouses—could potentially trade on insider information. “This is just a fig leaf to deflect from criticism. We necessitate to do more,” she tweeted.