Russia x Ukraine Ceasefire by...?

「Russia x Ukraine Ceasefire by...?」に関する最新の予測市場データによると、トレーダーの間で強いコンセンサスが形成されています。

現在、December 31 が 24.5% という圧倒的な勝率で市場を支配しています。October 31 が 21.5% で2番手、June 30 が 3.6% で3番手。この市場の賭け金はすでに $443.4K に達し、高い関心を示しています。

各結果の位置をより的確に評価するため、市場はインプライド確率と契約価格に基づいて3つの取引ティアに分けられます：

🥇 ティア1：圧倒的なリーダー

• December 31 (24.5%)：最も高い確率を持つ December 31 は板から厚く支持されています。この結果に賭けるトレーダーは 25¢ の「Buy Yes」契約価格に直面し、市場の強い確信を示しています。 この契約だけで $135.8K の出来高を生んでいます。

🥈 ティア2：主要な対抗馬

• October 31 (21.5%)：最も有力な対抗馬として、October 31 は 21.5% の的中確率を維持しています。「Buy Yes」株は現在 22¢ で取引されています。
• June 30 (3.6%)：3.6% の確率で3番手につけ、市場は June 30 に慎重な懐疑を示し、勢いが変わらない限り外部のワイルドカードと見なしています。

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ceasefire goes into effect prior to this market’s end date, this market will remain open until the ceasefire is no longer in effect, or until the 10 calendar days have been reached.

A ceasefire is considered no longer in effect when a consensus of credible reporting indicates the general suspension of hostilities has substantively ended across the primary theater.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.

人間のコンセンサスと投機的出来高がより広い予測市場を形作る一方で、当社の定量アルゴリズムはデータ駆動の対抗的視点を提供します。ファンダメンタルなシグナル、基調トレンド、過去の分布を分析し、AI バリュエーションモデルは各結果に独立した「フェアバリュー」確率を算出します。

このフェアバリューを現在の取引価値と比較すると、大きな乖離——すなわち期待値（EV）ギャップ——が明らかになります。プラスの EV ギャップは統計的に割安な結果を、マイナスの EV ギャップは市場の過剰反応の可能性を示します。

トップ AI アルファ＆ミスプライス裁定機会

最新のデータモデル実行に基づき、いくつかの主要な契約が顕著な乖離を示しています：

• ベストバリュー（最高 EV）：当社のモデルは June 30 を盤面で最も妙味のある機会と特定しました。市場は 3.6% の取引確率しか与えていませんが、AI のフェアバリュー評価は 47.2% で、+43.7% という印象的な EV ギャップを生んでいます。
• 見落とされたダークホース：その他の顕著な乖離には October 31（EV ギャップ：+30.1%） が含まれます。これらのロングテール機会は、予測モデルの強い統計的裏付けにもかかわらず、板で大幅に割安に放置されています。