What is the Luck Share?

The answer first

The Luck Share takes a cohort of wallets that a leaderboard presents as the best, runs the same frozen skill test on every wallet with enough resolved positions to read, corrects for the number of tests run, and reports how much of the cohort does NOT survive. On the 2026-06-09 reading of Convexly's own published top-50 Polymarket cohort, the Luck Share is 100 percent: 0 of the 35 testable wallets clear the frozen, FDR-corrected bar, and 15 of 50 had too few resolved positions to test at all.

Read that carefully, because it is easy to over-read. The claim is NOT that these wallets have no skill. The claim is that at these sample sizes their resolved records cannot be told apart from chance at the corrected bar, in either direction. That honest limit is the finding.

Worked example: the 2026-06-09 reading

The published top-50 Edge Score cohort breaks down like this in the frozen scan:

15 of 50 had fewer than 30 resolved positions: too thin to test, not counted as testable.
19 of 35 testable read as not separable from chance: their bootstrap 95 percent intervals include zero.
15 of 35 testable are too concentrated to read as a clean edge: a single event drives at least 60 percent of the net result.
1 of 35 testable had a positive interval before correction, roughly what chance predicts across 35 tests (about 0.9 false positives expected at a 2.5 percent one-sided threshold), and it does not survive the multiple-comparisons correction. Its net PnL on the board is negative.

Cleared after correction: 0 of 35. The one-sided 95 percent upper bound on the true clear-rate is about 9 percent (rule of three, 3 divided by 35), so the reading is consistent with a small share of genuinely separable records but not a large one.

Why the number exists

Most prediction-market trackers rank wallets by raw profit. At the sample sizes real wallets have, profit does not separate skill from variance: a fat-tailed market hands large realized PnL to some wallets by chance alone. The Luck Share is the inverse of a leaderboard. Instead of asking "who made the most?" it asks "how much of the cohort survives a corrected skill test?" and publishes the answer even when the answer is zero. Publishing the zero is what makes the bar worth anything when a record eventually clears it.

What the Luck Share does NOT claim

It does not claim any individual wallet is lucky. It does not claim the cohort has no skill. It does not forecast future performance: a past read is not a forecast. And it is not a verdict on the 15 concentration-flagged wallets, whose issue is different: their records are dominated by a single event, which more positions would not fix. The precise register for each state is fixed in the lexicon.

Where the readings live

The dated reading ledger is at /research/luck-share. The full per-wallet table behind it, with every interval and the one uncorrected positive record, is at /research/top50-skill-scan. Both are built from the same frozen artifact, so they can never disagree. Diagnostics on public on-chain records, not investment advice.

Check a specific wallet

Paste any Polymarket wallet into the free analyzer. It returns the same skill-vs-chance read with its interval, not a profit screenshot.

Check a Polymarket wallet

Convexly publishes new methodology research roughly every 6-8 weeks plus the /learn series on a rolling cadence. Get the next paper in your inbox when it ships:

Frequently asked

What is the Luck Share?

The share of Convexly's own published top-50 Polymarket cohort whose realized record cannot be separated from chance at its frozen, FDR-corrected bar. The latest reading (2026-06-09 scan) is 100 percent: 0 of the 35 testable wallets clear the bar, with 15 of 50 too thin to test.

Does a 100 percent Luck Share mean top Polymarket traders have no skill?

No. It means that at these sample sizes the resolved records cannot distinguish skill from chance at the corrected bar. Absence of corrected evidence of skill is not evidence of no skill. The honest limit is the finding: a profit screenshot tells you even less than these tests do.

How is the Luck Share computed?

For each wallet in the published top-50 cohort with at least 30 resolved positions, Convexly computes the realized entry edge (how much more often entries resolved true than the price paid implied) with a bootstrap 95 percent interval and a concentration screen, then applies a Benjamini-Hochberg false-discovery-rate correction across the cohort. The Luck Share is the share of testable wallets that do not clear the corrected bar.

Could the true clear-rate still be high?

The 2026-06-09 reading of 0 cleared out of 35 testable puts a one-sided 95 percent upper bound of about 9 percent on the true clear-rate (rule of three, 3 divided by 35). So the data are consistent with a small share of genuinely separable records, but not with a large one, in this cohort at these sample sizes.

Why publish a number that says your own leaderboard cannot be separated from chance?

Because the alternative is pretending otherwise. Most trackers rank wallets by raw profit and let readers assume profit means skill. Convexly publishes the corrected test result for its own cohort, including when the answer is zero, so that the same bar can be trusted when a record eventually clears it.

Where do the underlying numbers live?

The dated readings and the per-wallet ledger are at /research/luck-share. The full per-wallet scan, with every interval, the concentration screens, and the one uncorrected positive record, is at /research/top50-skill-scan. The two surfaces are built from the same frozen artifact so they can never disagree.