Prediction Markets Face Scrutiny Over Cardi B Appearance at Super Bowl LX

What counts as a performance became a live question for prediction markets on Sunday night after Cardi B appeared during Bad Bunny's Super Bowl halftime set. The brief cameo triggered confusion across platforms, with millions of dollars at stake over how narrowly the rules defined a "performance."

Cardi B did not sing or deliver a solo segment. She only appeared on stage, danced, and mouthed lyrics. The appearance resembled a cameo rather than a featured performance, but prediction market apps required a binary resolution.

On Polymarket alone, more than $4.4 million had been wagered on whether Cardi B would perform during the show. The operator determined that the appearance met its threshold for what counted as a performance. Under its market rules, a contract would resolve to “yes” if Cardi B performed live and in person during the show.

Despite its acknowledgment, the decision was later disputed and subject to final review later in the week.

Kalshi faced a more complicated interpretation. Its rules required three conditions for an appearance to count as a performance: being onstage, actively performing (such as dancing or singing), and appearing as a scheduled or guest performer.

Cardi B appeared to meet those criteria. However, the rules also excluded appearances that involved dancing on stage without singing or playing instruments, creating internal ambiguity.

Citing the lack of clarity, Kalshi invoked a provision that allowed it to settle contracts at its discretion when outcomes were not fully addressed by existing rules. The market was settled at the last traded price. Traders who backed a performance received $0.26 per contract, while those who bet against it received $0.74.

Polymarket criticized for Venezuela contracts

The halftime controversy followed a separate dispute that had already inflamed Polymarket users over geopolitical betting contracts tied to Venezuela. Traders who had wagered more than $10.5 million on whether the US would invade Venezuela this year saw their bets invalidated after the capture of Nicolás Maduro was ruled not to constitute an invasion.

In the days before Maduro was seized, some traders placed large positions in contracts that predicted he would be removed from power by Jan. 31. One anonymous account appeared to invest $30,000 on that outcome and briefly showed paper gains exceeding $430,000 after news of the capture broke.

Polymarket later clarified that the event did not meet the criteria outlined in its invasion market rules. Following that clarification, the implied probability of an invasion before the January deadline collapsed to below 5%.

Most of the money wagered on the platform had been tied to the January contract, with additional bets placed on later deadlines in March and December. Some individual traders had staked sums in the tens of thousands.

The ruling triggered anger across the platform, with users accusing Polymarket of redefining terms after the fact. The platform has maintained that its resolutions follow contract language rather than political interpretation.