Political Insider Information as a Market Tool

XAU/USD

Key zone: 4,500.00 - 4,750.00

Buy: 4,850.00 (on a decisive break of the 4,750 level); target 5,000-5,100; StopLoss 4,750.00

Sell: 4,500.00 (on a strongly negative fundamental backdrop); target 4,200-4,000; StopLoss 4,600.00

Spontaneous decisions by the U.S. President are becoming the norm in modern politics, but the financial market continues to record unexpected large trades executed shortly before key statements by Trump. Such trades bring million-dollar profits to certain well-prepared traders.

Reminder:

Insider trading is considered illegal if a person uses material non-public information to which they have access through their position or confidential connections. The use of insider information in exchange trading is considered a criminal offense in the United States (and beyond). In the U.S., this is regulated, in particular, by the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the rules of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

However, proving such cases is quite difficult.

Reuters analysts identified at least four suspicious situations where large speculative trades appeared in the market flow before major decisions were announced. At those moments, sharp movements were observed across various instruments — options, commodity futures (oil, gold), and prediction markets.

• In April 2025, options traders made millions by placing large bets literally minutes before Trump announced a suspension of tariffs. After that, the S&P 500 index rose by 9.5%.
• In January, an unknown participant on Polymarket earned more than $400,000 by betting on the removal of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. The account had been created shortly before and placed a bet exceeding $300,000.
• At the end of February, betting activity on prediction markets ahead of the assassination of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei also raised suspicions. Six accounts earned around $1.2 million by placing bets just hours before the attack.
• Unknown traders placed bets totaling around $500 million just minutes before Trump announced a delay in a strike on Iran’s energy infrastructure. This led to a drop in oil prices. In the spot gold market, short-term large-volume trades were also observed, which allowed for highly efficient stop-loss hunting on both sides of the price. The CME exchange, where these trades occurred, declined to comment.

Another manipulation was observed yesterday in U.S. futures: primitive in execution, yet highly effective.

• At 17:33, a relatively large volume of S&P 500 futures purchases passed through CME without any obvious reason. By 17:36, U.S. media released the first headline claiming that Oman and Iran were developing a protocol for vessel transit through the Strait of Hormuz. Naturally, this sounded like a precursor to a full reopening of the strait. Algorithmic trading systems immediately reacted by buying. The market moved higher.

The news itself is fake — or rather, an interpretation of an Iranian report with deliberate omission of the broader context.

The large amounts and binary structure of such trades suggest a strategy rather than confidence based on concrete information.

The White House rejected such assumptions. A spokesperson stated that federal employees are prohibited from profiting from non-public information and called any accusations without evidence unfounded.

Proof in such cases is built not on a single fact but on a combination of data: unusual trades before major news, abnormal profits, corporate insiders (employees, directors), participant testimonies, communication records, and so on.

At the same time, simpler explanations cannot be ruled out. Some traders may have simply “guessed” market direction or identified signals others missed. Moreover, large funds increasingly employ former military personnel, security specialists, and other “information operatives,” giving them an advantage in interpreting political risks.

But predicting Trump’s actions — and doing so in time to place trades — borders on the fantastic.

Such operations should attract regulatory attention, although enforcement in this area remains difficult. Moreover, the fight against such market manipulation has effectively stalled. The situation is further complicated by personnel changes at the SEC, reducing the likelihood that such cases will become a priority.

In practice, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission does not act as a “lone detective,” but rather as an analytical machine combined with a network of sources and enforcement partners. Yet they rarely punish such speculators — perhaps because it benefits someone.

So we act wisely and avoid unnecessary risks.

Profits to y’all!