FAA outage attributed to hack?

According to the latest prediction market data for the query “FAA outage attributed to hack?”, traders have formed a strong consensus.

Currently, No is dominating the market with an overwhelming 95.1% chance of winning. Yes follows in second place at 5%. The betting volume for this specific market has already reached $120.9K, reflecting intense industry interest.

To better assess where each potential outcome stands, the market can be segmented into three distinct trading tiers based on implied probability and contract pricing:

🥇 Tier 1: The Dominant Leader

• No (95.1%): Currently commanding the highest probability, No is heavily favored by the order book. Traders looking to back this outcome face a “Buy Yes” contract price of 95¢, signaling a high degree of market conviction.

🥈 Tier 2: The Primary Challengers

• Yes (5%): Positioned as the most viable alternative, Yes maintains a 5% chance of resolving true. Its “Buy Yes” shares currently trade at 5¢.

This market will resolve to "Yes" if the U.S. government officially attributes the November 13, 2026, FAA outage to a hack between market creation and November 30, 2026, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to "No".

The FAA outage refers to the equipment and communications outage that led the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to issue a nationwide ground stop on departures from U.S. airports on November 13, 2026.

"A hack" encompasses intentional, malicious activity that caused the outage.

A qualifying attribution is a public statement by an authorized representative of the U.S. federal government acting in an official capacity stating that the outage was caused by a hack. Criminal charges filed by U.S. federal prosecutors alleging that the outage was caused by a hack will also qualify.

Statements describing a hack as suspected, likely, probable, or not ruled out, or stating only that the outage bears the hallmarks of or is consistent with a hack, will not qualify. Statements by anonymous or unnamed officials or by governments of other countries will not qualify on their own.

Once a qualifying attribution is made, this market will resolve to "Yes" regardless of any later retraction or the outcome of legal proceedings.

The primary resolution source for this market will be official statements and publications from the U.S. government; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.

While human consensus and speculative volume shape the broader prediction market, our quantitative algorithms offer a data-driven counter-perspective. By analyzing fundamental signals, underlying trends and historical distributions, our AI Valuation model calculates an independent “Fair Value” probability for each outcome.

Comparing this Fair Value against the current Trade Value uncovers major disparities — known as the Expected Value (EV) Gap. Contracts with a positive EV Gap represent statistically underpriced outcomes, whereas a negative EV Gap flags a potential market overreaction.

Top AI Alpha & Mispriced Arbitrage Opportunities

Based on the latest data model run, several key contracts stand out with significant deviations:

• The Most Overvalued Outcome No currently trades at 95.1%, but our AI places its Fair Value at just 90.5%. This creates a large negative EV Gap of -4.6%, suggesting the crowd may be overhyping this outcome and driving the premium too high.
• The Best Value Play (Highest EV) Our model identifies Yes as the premium value opportunity on the board. While the market only assigns it a 5% trading probability, our AI’s Fair Value assessment sits at 9.5% — yielding an impressive +4.6% EV Gap.