A report on the Vote Markets

September 2021

---

An analysis by @LIzzl Datadeo#8507. For original analytics see this pdf file.

Users have voted over 37 rounds to predict the market performance of Defi tokens using a new voting mechanism called Quadratic Voting.

This report analyses the information that was compiled from those votes. The main questions answered are:

• How did users interact with the platform?

• How did voters apply Quadratic Voting?

• What makes a user a successful predictor?

• What is the predictive power of markets.vote?

What is Quadratic Voting?

That’s a voting strategy that helps balance the voting power of big players and small ones. The idea standing behind QV mechanism is to make each additional vote cost a lot more than the previous one.

It’s worth to remember that in QV participants vote for or against an issue, but also express how strongly they feel about it.

The table down below depicts how cost in tokens depends on the number of votes:

Number of votes	Cost in Tokens
1	1
2	4
3	9
4	16
5	25
6	36
7	49
8	64
9	81
10	100

More on quadratic voting: click here or here.

How does the markets.vote work?

Users are incentivized to make market predictions in a series of tournaments focussed on a basket of crypto assets.

Quadratic voting is used to generate a consensus in a perceived future market order. Users get a default voting power of 100$V. They then spend a budget of voting power to create a new order, based on their perception of token quality and future potential market performance.

Users are rewarded with a proportional share of a network-generated reward pool depending on the proportionality of their correctness.

Users can amplify their voting power beyond the starting level by demonstrating a history of correct decision-making in the markets, or by purchasing more identities.

More on markets.vote in the whitepaper. Check out also markets.vote app.

Voter Activity

How did users interact with vote markets?
Total voters	298
Total votes	1379
Total voterIDs	597
Average votes per round	38
Average user would mint	2 voterIDs
No voterID has ever been transfered

Voter turnout

Voter turnout with transaction cost*

• (average amount of ETH spent per transaction)

How did voter apply QV?

On average, voters used 72% of their voting power per vote.

100, 125, 97 were three most used amounts of voting power.

On average, voters made 5 choices per vote.

With 10, 4, 1 being the most used number of choices.

Coin clairvoyants

Top 3 wallets with most Voting Power
Address	0x34…39EA	0x6e…dDec	0x67…e640
Voting Power	5400	4406	3501
# of voterID	50	5	15
# of rounds participated	3	26	16
% of voting power used	95.9%	45.9%	61.3%
AVG # of choices	4.1	3.7	9.9
3 most weight combination used	[5,5,5,5]	[10,10]	[4,4,5,4,4,4,4,4,4,4]
	[5,5,5,5,5]	[12,12]	[4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4]
		[10]	[3,3,4,3,3,3,3,3,3,3]

Top 3 Voting Power Earners
Address	0x6e…dDec	0xDc…CA7D	0xB3…6B7C
Bought Voting Power	500	200	100
Earned Voting Power	3906	1074	469
% Increase	781.2%	537%	375%

How did the most successful voters used the vote markets?
# of rounds participated	26	25	20
% of voting power used	45.9%	47.5%	45.3%
AVG # of choices	3.7	5.8	9.7
3 most weight combination used	[10,10]	[5,5,5,5]	[EACH VOTE A DIFFERENT COMBINATION]
	[12,12]	[+48 DIFFERENT COMBINATIONS]
	[10]

Market predictions

6 out of 30 coins were predicted successfully. Successful predictions were made in rounds 3,7,12,14,24,28.

There was no particular coin that was predicted more successfully than others.