Russia x Ukraine Ceasefire by...?

Laut den neuesten Prognosemarktdaten zur Frage „Russia x Ukraine Ceasefire by...?“ haben die Händler einen starken Konsens gebildet.

Derzeit dominiert December 31 den Markt mit einer überwältigenden Gewinnwahrscheinlichkeit von 24,5%. October 31 folgt auf dem zweiten Platz mit 21,5%, während June 30 mit 3,6% auf dem dritten Platz liegt. Das Wettvolumen dieses Marktes hat bereits $443,4K erreicht, was auf großes Interesse hindeutet.

Um besser einzuschätzen, wo jedes mögliche Ergebnis steht, lässt sich der Markt anhand der impliziten Wahrscheinlichkeit und der Kontraktpreise in drei Handelsstufen unterteilen:

🥇 Stufe 1: Der dominante Spitzenreiter

• December 31 (24,5%): Mit der höchsten Wahrscheinlichkeit wird December 31 vom Orderbuch stark favorisiert. Wer auf dieses Ergebnis setzen will, sieht sich einem „Buy Yes“-Kontraktpreis von 25¢ gegenüber – ein Zeichen hoher Marktüberzeugung. Allein dieser Kontrakt hat $135.8K Volumen erzeugt.

🥈 Stufe 2: Die wichtigsten Herausforderer

• October 31 (21,5%): Als tragfähigste Alternative hält October 31 eine Wahrscheinlichkeit von 21,5%, einzutreten. Seine „Buy Yes“-Anteile werden derzeit zu 22¢ gehandelt.
• June 30 (3,6%): Auf dem dritten Platz mit 3,6% Wahrscheinlichkeit zeigt der Markt eine maßvolle Skepsis gegenüber June 30 und behandelt es als Außenseiter, sofern sich die Dynamik nicht ändert.

This market will resolve to "Yes" if a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine goes into effect by 11:59 PM Eastern European Time (EET) on the specified date and remains continuously in effect for at least 10 calendar days. Otherwise, this market will resolve to "No".

A ceasefire refers to any mutually agreed suspension of direct military engagement between Russia and Ukraine, which is officially announced by both countries or confirmed by a consensus of credible reporting to have been mutually agreed by both countries, and which constitutes a general suspension of direct kinetic military engagement across the primary theater of the overall conflict. A broader peace deal, normalization agreement, political framework, truce, or humanitarian pause (including holiday ceasefires) will count provided they otherwise qualify under this market’s rules.

Any form of informal understanding, backchannel communication, de-escalation without an announced agreement, or unilateral pause in hostilities will not be considered a ceasefire. Agreements which only apply to specific conflict categories (e.g. restrictions on certain target categories or certain locations) will not qualify.

Any calendar day (EET) during which the ceasefire is in effect (including the first day of the ceasefire) will count towards the 10-day total. The required 10 day period will end at 11:59 PM EET on the 10th day (inclusive). If a qualifying ceasefire goes into effect prior to this market’s end date, this market will remain open until the ceasefire is no longer in effect, or until the 10 calendar days have been reached.

A ceasefire is considered no longer in effect when a consensus of credible reporting indicates the general suspension of hostilities has substantively ended across the primary theater. Temporary or technical lapses or expiration of a formal ceasefire term, isolated incidents, localized violations, or accusations alone will not invalidate the ceasefire provided the general suspension of hostilities across the primary theater continues. Where official government statements conflict with a consensus of credible field reporting, the reporting will take precedence over the government statements.

The resolution source for this market will be a consensus of credible sources.

Examples of qualifying Ceasefires:

April 8, 2026 US–Iran ceasefire: The United States and Iran publicly announced and implemented a mutually agreed ceasefire framework intended to broadly halt direct military hostilities between the two countries. Despite subsequent maritime confrontations, alleged violations, isolated retaliatory strikes, and disputes regarding compliance, the broader ceasefire framework continued to function and widescale fighting across the primary theater did not resume.

November 27, 2024 Israel–Hezbollah ceasefire: Israel and Hezbollah implemented a broadly operative ceasefire framework brokered through international mediators that substantially reduced hostilities across southern Lebanon and northern Israel, including the effective halt of Israel’s major ground offensive into Lebanon and a significant reduction in Hezbollah rocket fire. Although the ceasefire was not formally announced through a single joint declaration by both parties and public statements differed in framing and characterization, a consensus of credible reporting confirmed the arrangement had been mutually agreed and implemented in practice. Despite continued isolated strikes, alleged violations, and disputes regarding compliance, credible reporting broadly treated the ceasefire as remaining operational and widescale fighting across the primary theater of the conflict did not resume.

Examples of non qualifying Ceasefires:

November 24, 2023 Israel–Hamas humanitarian pause: Although it was a mutually agreed and publicly announced broad suspension of hostilities across Gaza, the ceasefire framework remained in effect for only approximately 7 days before wide-scale fighting resumed, failing the required 10-calendar-day duration requirement. Ceasefire violations prior to November 30, would not have invalidated the ceasefire.

July 22, 2022 Black Sea Grain Initiative: Although Russia and Ukraine entered into internationally brokered agreements governing grain exports and reducing risks to commercial shipping in the Black Sea, the arrangement did not constitute a general suspension of direct military engagement across the primary theater of the war. Hostilities continued across Ukraine throughout the duration of the agreement and the arrangement applied only to specific categories of activity and geographic areas.

May 2023 Sudan ceasefires (SAF–RSF): Although the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and Rapid Support Forces (RSF) publicly agreed to multiple internationally brokered ceasefires, a consensus of credible reporting indicated that the general suspension of hostilities across the primary theater never substantively took effect and large-scale fighting broadly continued throughout the ceasefire periods. While some temporary reductions in violence and localized humanitarian access reportedly occurred in certain areas, artillery fire, airstrikes, urban combat, troop movements, and offensive operations continued across major parts of Sudan almost immediately after implementation. Credible reporting broadly treated the ceasefires as having failed or collapsed in practice despite technically remaining in force on paper.

Während menschlicher Konsens und spekulatives Volumen den breiteren Prognosemarkt prägen, bieten unsere quantitativen Algorithmen eine datengetriebene Gegenperspektive. Durch Analyse fundamentaler Signale, zugrunde liegender Trends und historischer Verteilungen berechnet unser KI-Bewertungsmodell für jedes Ergebnis eine unabhängige „Fair-Value“-Wahrscheinlichkeit.

Der Vergleich dieses Fair Value mit dem aktuellen Marktwert deckt große Abweichungen auf – die sogenannte Erwartungswert-(EV-)Lücke. Kontrakte mit positiver EV-Lücke sind statistisch unterbewertete Ergebnisse, während eine negative EV-Lücke auf eine mögliche Marktüberreaktion hinweist.

Top-KI-Alpha & fehlbepreiste Arbitrage-Chancen

Auf Basis des jüngsten Datenmodell-Laufs fallen mehrere Schlüsselkontrakte mit deutlichen Abweichungen auf:

• Der beste Value-Play (höchster EV): Unser Modell identifiziert June 30 als die attraktivste Value-Chance auf dem Board. Während der Markt ihm nur eine Handelswahrscheinlichkeit von 3,6% zuweist, liegt die Fair-Value-Einschätzung unserer KI bei 47,2% – eine beeindruckende EV-Lücke von +43,7%.
• Unbeachtete Außenseiter: Weitere bemerkenswerte Abweichungen sind October 31 (EV-Lücke: +30,1%). Diese Long-Tail-Chancen werden von den Orderbüchern trotz stärkerer statistischer Untermauerung deutlich abgewertet.