Prediction markets are sometimes wrong but they are very accurate on high volume markets like this one. Here we have hyperliquid perpetual futures among other things. Volume on those alone is above 10M USD per day.

>>Less sarcastically though the bet on how much AI company IPO at attracts a certain type of people. People who may have a certain believe about AI companies which will bias their assumptions quite a bit.

Yeah but there is also someone on the other side.

▲

xyzzy_plugh an hour ago | parent | next [-]

They're not very accurate. They are generally accurate with a margin of error big enough that they're far from a sure thing. If they were accurate then no one would take a contrarian position. I'd look at a prediction and say "well obviously the favored side is going to win" and put all my money there, over and over again, until I was the richest mortal in the universe.

Polymarket has it at ~50% that their IPO value is between 1.25T and 1.5T. Do you think that is representative of reality? It's not like we get to flip the IPO coin ten times.

	▲	bluecalm 33 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		>>If they were accurate then no one would take a contrarian position. Sure, the price is the weighted average of expectations. People take either side for many reasons though. There would still be a lot of training in a perfectly efficient market because people and institutions have their own utility of money functions and other reasons to take bets (hedging their vesting stock for example). >>. I'd look at a prediction and say "well obviously the favored side is going to win" and put all my money there, over and over again, until I was the richest mortal in the universe. >>Polymarket has it at ~50% that their IPO value is between 1.25T and 1.5T. Do you think that is representative of reality? It's not like we get to flip the IPO coin ten times. Yeah, it's the best guess we have. >> It's not like we get to flip the IPO coin ten times. That's very limited frequentist perspective. Just because you can't re-run the experiment doesn't mean you can't assign probabilities to events.

▲

dofm an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

> but they are very accurate on high volume markets like this one

But this number isn't a matter of market volume, is it?

It's a matter of what analysts, regulators, banks, and investors choose.

And they appear to not be that keen on a valuation that high, judging by the press.

▲

jmb99 24 minutes ago | parent [-]

In theory though that’s the whole point of the prediction markets. If all analysts truly believe (with conviction) that the number should be <1.2T, then they can put their money where their mouth is in the prediction market that’s currently overshooting their predictions by 20-40%. If they don’t have much conviction, then maybe the stories in the media aren’t their true beliefs or they’re trying to push a narrative.

	▲	dofm 19 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Why does HN have this "if they won't bet on it, they don't believe it" mindset? In quite a lot of sectors, gambling on a prediction market for an outcome you can influence is frowned upon, unethical, even illegal. To be clear, I am talking about the investment analysts who have a role in setting the IPO price, which is a (then-private) decision, not an outcome of a market. It would almost certainly be a crime for the analysts involved in pricing an IPO to make prediction market bets.