TOTAL VOLUME:
$134.1b
24H VOL:
$141,541,542
24H TRANSACTIONS:
2,388,728,490
OPEN INTEREST:
$1,440,096,988
406,065
Markets across
30,522
events
MATCHED EVENTS:
2,692
PLATFORM COVERAGE:
5
Polymarket:
39%
VS.
Kalshi:
61%
Closed: Jul 6, 6:00 AM EST
Polymarket
This event group covers the Wimbledon WTA tennis match between Belinda Bencic and Mika Stojsavljevic, originally scheduled for June 29, 2026 at 09:03 UTC (6:00 AM ET). Markets track both the match winner and whether the match is completed under normal play conditions.
This market refers to the tennis match between Belinda Bencic and Mika Stojsavljevic in the Wimbledon WTA, originally scheduled for June 29, 2026 at 6:00AM ET. This market will resolve to 'Belinda Bencic' if Belinda Bencic advances against Mika Stojsavljevic. This market will resolve to 'Mika Stojsavljevic' if Mika Stojsavljevic advances against Belinda Bencic. If the match is canceled (not played at all), ends in a tie, or is delayed beyond 7 days from the scheduled date without a winner determined, this market will resolve to 50-50. If the match begins but is not completed, and one player advances due to the opponent's retirement, default, or disqualification, this market will resolve to the player who advances. If the match ends in a walkover (player withdraws before the start and the other advances automatically), this market will resolve to 50-50. The primary resolution source will be official information from the WTA Tour. A consensus of credible reporting may also be used.
This market will resolve to "Belinda Bencic" if Belinda Bencic defeats Mika Stojsavljevic in their Wimbledon match originally scheduled for June 29, 2026, 09:03 UTC. It will resolve to "Mika Stojsavljevic" if Mika Stojsavljevic defeats Belinda Bencic. For the purposes of this market, a player officially declared the winner of the match will be considered to have defeated the opponent, including in cases of walkover, retirement, withdrawal, default, or disqualification.
Both platforms track the same underlying event, yet price divergence is common. Polymarket and Limitless can show different implied probabilities for the same outcome because of liquidity, fee structure, participant mix, and how each venue defines the contract. Differences stem from distinct user bases, liquidity pools, fee structures, and order-flow timing. Polymarket may attract traders with different risk appetites or information sets than Limitless, causing temporary mispricings. Arbitrageurs can exploit these gaps, but friction costs and platform-specific rules often prevent instant convergence. Monitoring both venues reveals where conviction is strongest and where uncertainty persists.