A statement from Google confirmed that the company is cooperating with law enforcement regarding an investigation into a former employee’s betting activities, which involved accessing internal marketing materials. The employee in question has been placed on leave following allegations of using confidential information to place significant bets, a violation of company policy. Google emphasized that such actions are taken seriously.
According to a complaint filed by US authorities, the individual, identified as Spagnuolo, allegedly placed approximately $2.75 million in bets between mid-October and early December 2025. These bets focused on outcomes from Google’s annual Year in Search for 2025, particularly on searches for various personalities. The bets were predominantly on the “No” side of questions regarding who would be the most searched person, including high-profile figures such as Bianca Censori, Pope Leo XIV, and Donald Trump.
Specific entries included a substantial wager of nearly $940,000 against Bianca Censori being the top searched person and over $600,000 against Pope Leo XIV achieving the same status. Other significant bets involved familiar names in popular culture and media, like Kendrick Lamar and Sydney Sweeney, suggesting a diverse betting portfolio.
The unusual success of Spagnuolo’s account, known as AlphaRaccoon, drew attention in online communities, leading to speculation among users of platforms like Discord and X (formerly Twitter) that the account was operated by someone with insider knowledge from Google. In response to this growing scrutiny, the username AlphaRaccoon was changed to an alphanumeric wallet address in early December.
Alongside the criminal investigation, Spagnuolo was also charged with civil complaints from the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), which asserted that he achieved extraordinarily accurate results with his bets. The dual legal actions prompted a comprehensive investigation into the integrity of the betting activities linked to the employee’s access to confidential company information. The case has raised significant questions about ethical conduct within corporate environments and the potential for insider betting in forecasting market outcomes.
