Betting on the ballot
On Polymarket, close to a million dollars have been hedged over Bangladesh’s election outcome
As Bangladesh approaches its 13th parliamentary election, a parallel contest is also underway, far from polling stations and party offices.
On screens rather than streets, people are hedging their bets on who will win through online prediction markets where election outcomes are traded like financial assets. In these digital spaces, votes have become odds and politics a speculative exercise, something you can buy into for a few cents or thousands of dollars.
On one such platform, Polymarket, close to a million dollars have already changed hands over Bangladesh's election outcome. Traders purchase "Yes" or "No" options on whether a particular party will win, with prices fluctuating in real time as confidence rises or collapses.
Keep updated, follow The Business Standard's Google news channel
At its peak, on 4 February 6am, the market priced a victory for the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) at 94%, while rival parties slid into single digits or statistical irrelevance.
On 9 February 4pm, in the Polymarket race, eight parties were competing. BNP held at 88%, up by 20 points from when betting first began on 17 December 2025 at 6am, consolidating its position at the top of the market. Meanwhile, Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami stood at 13%, down six points from 17 December, continuing a gradual slide as trading volume concentrated around the frontrunner.
The comment section on Polymarket reads less like a forecasting forum and more like a hybrid of a trading desk and a political street rally. Many users openly admit that Jamaat-e-Islami is unlikely to win, yet treat it as a speculative asset rather than a political force.
As one bettor put it, "Jamaat is unlikely to win, but this could be your best opportunity to scalp this," framing the election as a short-term price play rather than a democratic contest.
Others focused on timing and volatility instead of outcomes. One comment predicted that Jamaat's odds will drop further on election day and advised waiting to buy at a cheaper price, while another boasted of holding out for a "10x" return. The language is unmistakably financial, even when the subject is electoral politics.
Running parallel to this market logic is a stream of overt political sloganeering and abuse. Supporters post emotional declarations such as, "This kind of opportunity may not come again — long live Jamaat!" while opponents respond with insults and threats. Religious expressions, nationalist rhetoric and crude slurs coexist in the same thread, often directed at fellow traders.
Several users also question the credibility of the market itself, arguing that foreigners, algorithms or social-media narratives are distorting prices. One commenter claimed that overseas traders and AI models are blindly driving up BNP odds, while others warn that YouTube comments and urban online enthusiasm do not reflect rural voting patterns.
Several users also question the credibility of the market itself, arguing that foreigners, algorithms or social-media narratives are distorting prices. One commenter claimed that overseas traders and AI models are blindly driving up BNP odds, while others warn that YouTube comments and urban online enthusiasm do not reflect rural voting patterns. As one trader cautioned, social media sentiment cannot be mistaken for electoral reality.
This is not a uniquely Bangladeshi phenomenon. Betting on elections has a long and surprisingly respectable history.
In 19th-century Britain and the United States, bookmakers openly accepted wagers on parliamentary and presidential races, and newspapers reported odds as a proxy for public mood. In modern times, regulated betting exchanges in the UK routinely offer odds on general elections, leadership contests, and referendums.
During the 2020 US presidential election, prediction markets were closely watched for their ability to react faster than traditional polls, sometimes adjusting within minutes to new information.
It is unique, especially in countries where politics is polarised and information tightly controlled. Online prediction markets are borderless, anonymous, and often crypto-based, placing them beyond the reach of local regulators.
For participants, this distance offers freedom. But it raises uncomfortable questions. Are these markets simply aggregating collective wisdom, or are they amplifying rumours and reinforcing fatalism?
On 12 February, Bangladesh's future will be decided by ballots, not bets. Polling stations, not prediction markets, will produce the official result.
Still, the money already placed online tells its own story — one about expectations, cynicism, and how politics now travels through the same speculative circuits as stocks, currencies, and crypto. Long before the votes are counted, the outcome has been priced.
Whether that price reflects reality is the gamble no market can resolve.
