VeriFact Markets Lets Users Bet on Controversial Facts and Past Events

Would you bet on what really happened? VeriFact Markets is launching a prediction market where users can wager on controversial questions about the past—including whether the new coronavirus originated in a laboratory or whether some Apollo 11 moon-landing footage was filmed on Earth.

The startup describes itself as a “prediction market for controversial facts.” Its premise is unusual: Instead of betting on what will happen next, users trade contracts based on disputed events that have already happened.

What Is VeriFact Markets?

VeriFact Markets launched on Friday with several contentious topics available for traders, including whether Jeffrey Epstein died by suicide and whether State Farm “intentionally delayed” insurance claims related to the 2025 Los Angeles wildfires.

The platform’s most prominent beta market focused on the origins of Covid-19. At the time of writing, the market remained open, with “true” priced at 76 cents and “false” priced at 32 cents. Most participants were betting on the claim that the pandemic began at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

A Prediction Market for Disputed History

VeriFact Markets is funded and supported by Positron Capital Management, the family office of technology investor Peter Wockwitz. He sees the startup as a way to help settle debates about contentious issues, including questions such as how much energy artificial-intelligence data centers consume.

“No one has ever done this before, so we’re very excited,” Wockwitz says. “We’re not trying to avoid controversial markets.”

How Traditional Prediction Markets Work

In a typical prediction market, participants purchase financial instruments known as event contracts. These contracts are based on whether a future event will occur. Topics can range from which team will win the Super Bowl to the price of Bitcoin 15 minutes from now or whether the United States and Iran will reach a nuclear agreement.

For example, someone who buys a “yes” contract on Polymarket predicting that the Chicago Bears will start Case Keenum next week would make money if that happens. Likewise, a person who bets “no” on Kalshi’s prediction that it will rain the next day in Miami would lose money if heavy rain occurs.

Every prediction market has its own rules for resolving contracts, and disputes can become complicated. Polymarket bettors have argued over whether Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was wearing a suit, while Kalshi traders revolted over how a market concerning whether Iran’s supreme leader would leave power should be settled.

How VeriFact Markets Resolves Controversial Claims

Resolving VeriFact Markets contracts is even more difficult by design. The platform focuses on events where people disagree about what happened. It lists past events it considers “debatable” and allows customers to bet “true” or “false.”

Users can submit evidence supporting or challenging their positions. The company also plans to offer rewards for reliable documentation that helps resolve a market.

VeriFact Markets will make a final determination when it believes there is enough evidence. If the company cannot reach a decision, it will “expire” the market and pay users according to the odds calculated at that time.