Iran full airspace closure by...?

According to the latest prediction market data for the query “Iran full airspace closure by...?”, traders have formed a strong consensus.

Currently, August 31 is dominating the market with an overwhelming 33% chance of winning. July 31 follows in second place at 19.5%, while July 15 sits in third with 12.5%. The betting volume for this specific market has already reached $8.9M, 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

• August 31 (33%): Currently commanding the highest probability, August 31 is heavily favored by the order book. Traders looking to back this outcome face a “Buy Yes” contract price of 33¢, signaling a high degree of market conviction. This contract alone has generated $1.5M in volume.

🥈 Tier 2: The Primary Challengers

• July 31 (19.5%): Positioned as the most viable alternative, July 31 maintains a 19.5% chance of resolving true. Its “Buy Yes” shares currently trade at 20¢.
• July 15 (12.5%): Sitting in third place with a 12.5% probability, the market shows measured skepticism toward July 15, treating it as an outside wildcard unless momentum shifts.

🥉 Tier 3: The Long-Tail Options (Combining for ~35%)

Beyond the top three choices, a wide field of macro variables and long-shot outcomes are being tracked. While their individual probabilities hover low, they represent crucial hedges for speculative traders:

• Alternative Options: This includes June 30 (4.4%).
• Speculative Volume: Despite low statistical likelihood, certain long-tail contracts like June 30 are still attracting notable interest.

This market will resolve to “Yes” if Iran initiates a general closure of its airspace, that is not solely due to weather conditions, between market creation and the specified date, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to “No”.

A “general closure” refers to a cancellation or suspension of aviation which is generally applicable to all commercial flights transiting Iranian airspace (“Tehran FIR”). A qualifying closure must apply generally to all of Iran or the Tehran FIR; limited cancellations, delays, or partial closures will not qualify. A closure which applies generally to commercial aviation across Iranian airspace, with limited exceptions for certain categories of flights, however, will qualify (e.g. exceptions for certain flights pre-approved by the Iranian Civil Aviation Authority may be permitted).

Qualifying previous examples include the February 28, 2026 total closure of Iranian airspace (https://www.iranintl.com/en/202602289115) and the January 2026 total closure of Iranian airspace except to international flights with express governmental permission (https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/iran-shuts-airspace-most-flights-flightradar24-says-2026-01-14/). Non-qualifying examples include the January 27, 2026 partial closure of Iranian airspace around the Strait of Hormuz (https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/iran-issues-airspace-notice-for-military-drills-near-strait-of-hormuz/3812508), the April 2024 closure of Iran’s western airspace (https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/iranian-airports-cancel-flights-until-monday-morning-2024-04-14/), and the January 25 - April 25, 2026 VFR (Visual Flight Rules) flights suspension which did not broadly close commercial aviation in Iran (https://www.intellinews.com/iran-suspends-general-aviation-and-vfr-flights-in-new-airspace-directive-421997/).

Warnings, No-Fly-Zones, or other flight restrictions imposed by airlines or countries other than Iran will not be sufficient for a “Yes” resolution.

Airspace closures which occur solely due to weather conditions, earthquakes, or volcanic eruptions, will not qualify.

The primary resolution sources for this market will be official information from Iranian aviation authorities and a consensus of credible reporting.

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 Best Value Play (Highest EV) Our model identifies June 30 as the premium value opportunity on the board. While the market only assigns it a 4.4% trading probability, our AI’s Fair Value assessment sits at 50.5% — yielding an impressive +46.1% EV Gap.
• Under-the-Radar Dark Horses Other notable discrepancies include July 15 (EV Gap: +21.7%) and July 31 (EV Gap: +21%). These long-tail opportunities are heavily discounted by the live order books despite stronger statistical backing from our predictive model.