That seems fair. It's possible to come up with an answer only given certain assumptions and conditions. This being the Polywell wiki, you'd probably want to use such assumptions as can be gleaned from Bussard and Nebel, and perhaps mention the more plausible skepticisms. I don't know if I would call anyone an expert; I think it's enough to say there are competing claims.
Confinement for ions or electrons or overall? Those are very different questions.I had not emphasized losses. Chrismb's point that a Tokamac needs to contain ions for hundreds of seconds (with distance traveled to fusion being many thousands of kilometers) to produce useful fusion is pertinate. To do this they have to have relatively excellent confinement. My impression is that the Polywell does not even come close to this.
Polywell orthodoxy is that ion losses are kept very small because we're keeping the mix electron-rich to confine them. IIRC Bussard pretty much ignores them completely and states there are essentially no ion losses, Rick's ITER comparison equation neglected to even include ion pressure (and he found no hotspots on the wall), and Joel's simulation had no ion current. Electrons are a different story.
I haven't seen any support for the idea background neutrals will carry off significant energy; Bussard seems confident ionization times are much too short for this to be possible (it seems intuitively obvious a neutral whose ionization energy is measured in eV won't carry off KeV energy, but maybe I'm missing something). Chacon's paper says ion thermalization can be acceptable.