Throughout US President Donald Trump's second term, traders have been placing millions in bets just before his major announcements, according to a BBC analysis of trade volume data. The investigation found a consistent pattern of market spikes just hours, or sometimes minutes, before a social media post or media interview went public.
Some analysts say it bears the hallmarks of illegal insider trading. Others, perhaps optimistically, suggest traders have simply become adept at anticipating the president's interventions. Here are five significant examples where the market seemed to know something the public didn't.
Some of the biggest movements were in oil futures. Nine days into the US-Israel war with Iran, Trump told CBS News the conflict was "very complete, pretty much." The public learned of this at 15:16 Eastern Time when the reporter posted on X. Oil prices plunged 25% on the news. However, a huge surge of bets on oil falling occurred at 18:29 GMT - a full 47 minutes before the reporter's post. Those traders made millions.
On 23 March, two days after threatening to "obliterate" Iran's power plants, Trump posted on Truth Social about "VERY GOOD AND PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATIONS" for a "COMPLETE AND TOTAL RESOLUTION." It was a major surprise. Immediately, stocks rose and the US benchmark oil price fell sharply. The BBC reported that 14 minutes before the post, there was an unusually high number of bets on the US oil price dropping, with a similar pattern for Brent crude. One analyst called the trades "abnormal, for sure."
Away from the Middle East, on 2 April last year, Trump announced sweeping global tariffs. A week later, he announced a 90-day "pause" on the levies for all countries except China, causing stock markets to soar. The S&P 500 jumped 9.5% - one of its largest single-day gains since WWII. Again, unusual trading preceded the event, with bets spiking on a fund tracking the S&P 500. Contracts traded jumped to over 10,000 per minute just after 18:00 BST, up from hundreds earlier. Some traders bet over $2m on the market increasing after seven days of losses, potentially generating a profit of almost $20m.
Several senior Democrats subsequently wrote to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) urging an investigation into whether the announcements "enriched administration insiders and friends." The SEC declined to comment to the BBC. The White House did not respond to requests for comment on the unusual trading activities.
The rise of online predictions markets like Polymarket and Kalshi has also drawn scrutiny. President Trump's son, Donald Trump Jr, is an investor in Polymarket and sits on its advisory board, and acts as a strategic advisor to Kalshi. In December 2025, a user named Burdensome-Mix placed $32,500 on Venezuela's President Nicolás Maduro being ousted by end of January 2026. When Maduro was seized by US special forces the next day, the account won $436,000, then changed its username and placed no more bets.
According to Bubblemaps, six accounts created on Polymarket in February all wagered on a US strike on Iran by 28 February. When Trump confirmed the attacks that day, they earned $1.2m. Five have placed no more bets; one subsequently made $163,000 by correctly betting on a US-Iran ceasefire by 7 April, announced that day. Polymarket told the BBC it maintains "the highest standards of market integrity" and works with regulators.
In March, both Polymarket and Kalshi outlined new rules to crack down on insider trading. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), which has jurisdiction, did not comment to the BBC, but its chair recently told Congress the organization had "zero tolerance" for fraud and insider trading. It also surfaced that the White House sent an internal email last month warning staff not to use insider information to bet on predictions markets. Spokesman Davis Ingle said any implication officials were engaged in such activity was "baseless and irresponsible."
Insider trading has been illegal for most Americans since 1933 and was extended to cover US government officials in 2012, though no one has been prosecuted under that law. Paul Oudin, a professor at ESSEC Business School, says the rules are difficult to enforce because authorities won't prosecute if they can't identify the source. He notes that while massive trades can clearly show someone knew what Trump was about to declare, there's a strong chance no one will be prosecuted. None of the US financial authorities contacted by the BBC acknowledged the allegations.