The definition of 'coup attempt' is strict, requiring an 'attempted execution'. Foiled plots or arrests without execution do not qualify. This creates a grey area, as coups are often secretive; distinguishing between a 'conspiracy without action' and an 'attempt crushed at inception' can be difficult based on limited public information.

Given China's current political stability and centralization of power, publicly discussing or predicting such an event is a low-probability 'black swan' scenario. This falls outside standard geopolitical forecasting, leaning heavily into speculative and fringe territory.

A coup attempt in China would be a geopolitical earthquake of global magnitude. The most direct impact would be on the Hang Seng Index (HSI) and China-related ETFs (like FXI), which would likely face a panic crash. Global risk-off sentiment would spike, driving up Gold prices. US equities (S&P 500) would likely drop due to uncertainty, and US Treasury yields could see significant volatility from flight-to-safety flows.

This is a highly unconventional entertainment/gossip market. While Timothée Chalamet's rap history ('Lil Timmy Tim') is a known meme, linking him specifically to 'EsDeeKid' (a supposed Liverpool rapper) is a niche internet conspiracy theory. This falls far outside mainstream election or financial forecasting, characterized by high novelty and internet culture specificity.

While global warming is a hot topic, betting on specific monthly temperature anomalies (down to 0.01 degrees) is a niche scientific data prediction, less common than elections or sports, but standard for climate watchers.

April 4, 2026 - April 5, 2026: The price of the 1.20–1.24ºC option surged from 28.5c to 39.5c. This was driven by changing market expectations or preliminary data signaling anomalously high April temperatures, causing a rapid inflow of capital into this bracket. Previous record: Data provided is a single snapshot; without historical price points, volatility cannot be detected.

The market pricing is heavily skewed towards high-temperature brackets (>1.20ºC), which diverges somewhat from traditional climate models that forecast a stronger cooling effect following a La Niña period. While many scientific projections anticipate a reversion closer to historical norms post-La Niña, traders are clearly betting that underlying secular warming and extreme climate inertia will easily overpower this cooling effect.

There is a significant 'literal vs. perception' trap. The rules strictly require 'physically entering' North Korean territory. The major risk is that Trump might meet Kim Jong Un in China (Beijing) or on the South Korean side of the DMZ during his April Asia trip. If Kim travels to China to meet Trump, or if they shake hands on the southern side of Panmunjom, the media will report a 'Trump-Kim Summit,' but the market will resolve to 'No'. Only a crossing of the demarcation line (like in 2019) or a flight to Pyongyang counts as 'Yes'.

Moderately exotic. While a sitting US President visiting North Korea is historically rare, Trump's precedent of crossing the DMZ in his first term, combined with current (Feb 2026) reports of his planned April trip to China and rumors of a meeting, moves this from 'unimaginable' to 'plausible political theater'. It is a quintessential personality-driven geopolitical event.

This event primarily impacts the geopolitical risk premium of the Korean Peninsula. A visit by Trump would generally be viewed as a strong signal of de-escalation. The most direct beneficiary would be the South Korea ETF (EWY), which could rally as the 'war risk discount' fades. Gold might see minor selling as a safe-haven unwind. US Defense stocks (e.g., LMT) could face slight sentiment-driven pressure due to peace expectations, but the impact would be limited.

This is a geopolitical prediction focusing on specific military actions. While not a topic for general daily discussion, it is not uncommon in circles monitoring sanctions enforcement, Middle East tensions, or energy security. The U.S. seizing tankers violating sanctions (especially involving Iran or Russia) has occurred periodically in recent years, making it not entirely exotic.

A U.S. seizure of an oil tanker typically signals an escalation in geopolitical tensions (especially regarding Iran), which directly stimulates crude oil prices due to fears of retaliation or supply chain disruptions. If this is an enforcement of sanctions against a major oil producer, oil prices could see medium to significant movement (Score 3). Gold might see a minor reaction as a safe haven. The impact on broader equity indices would likely be limited unless the event triggers a wider conflict.

April 12, 2026 - April 13, 2026, the Yes price for April 30 dropped from 58c to 44.5c. This decline was due to the lack of actual seizure actions by U.S. forces following the initial blockade announcement, causing market expectations to rationally cool down as time passed. April 11, 2026 - April 12, 2026, the Yes price for April 15 surged from 2.2c to 18.3c, and the April 30 Yes price skyrocketed from 12c to 58c. This was caused by the sudden announcement of a U.S. naval blockade on the Strait of Hormuz and explicit orders to seize ships paying tolls to Iran, completely reversing market expectations. April 8, 2026 - April 11, 2026, prices continued to decline smoothly as expiration dates approached, without any sudden movements exceeding 10c. The Yes price for April 15 dropped from 5.5c to 2.2c, and for April 30 from 15c to 12c. April 5, 2026 - April 8, 2026, the Yes price for the April 15 option dropped from 15.5c to 5.5c, and the April 30 option dropped from 25c to 15c. This decline was due to the approaching expiration dates and the complete absence of any public reports regarding U.S. oil tanker seizures during this period, causing market confidence to decay with time.

This is a prediction about the political fate of a high-ranking Chinese military official. While a standard topic for China elite politics watchers, for the general market it falls under niche, high-risk political speculation, being neither a mainstream election nor economic data.

As the Vice Chairman of the Central Military Commission, Zhang Youxia holds an extremely high status. If he were sentenced, it would signify severe turmoil or a purge within China's top leadership. Such high-level political uncertainty would directly hit investor confidence in Chinese markets, causing volatility in the offshore Yuan (CNY) and significantly impacting the Hang Seng Index (HSI) and large-cap China ETFs (e.g., FXI). Such a 'black swan' event would be interpreted as a spike in political risk premium.

April 8, 2026 - April 11, 2026, Option_'Yes' surged from 10.5c to 23c and then quickly plummeted back to 11.5c. This was caused by sudden negative rumors regarding Zhang Youxia triggering speculative buying, but as the rumors lacked official backing or were debunked, short-term capital quickly took profits or cut losses. March 30, 2026 - April 5, 2026, Option_'Yes' traded in a very narrow range between 10.5c and 13c. The reason is the prolonged lack of official news, resulting in continuous natural decay of time value and extremely flat trading sentiment. March 24, 2026 - March 29, 2026, Option_'Yes' gradually drifted down from 18c to 12.5c. The reason is the continuous decay of time value due to the lack of any official progress as time passes. March 17, 2026 - March 24, 2026, Option_'Yes' traded in a very narrow range between 17.5c and 18.5c. The reason is the market entering an information vacuum, with both bulls and bears waiting for further moves from state media, leading to shrinking volume. March 10, 2026 - March 16, 2026, Option_'Yes' slowly drifted down from 22c to 18c. The reason was the lack of anticipated major announcements following the conclusion of the 'Two Sessions,' causing speculative capital to exit. March 6, 2026 - March 8, 2026, Option_'Yes' drifted down from 27c to 23c. As the 'Two Sessions' reached their midpoint without immediate judicial breakthroughs, market hype cooled. February 28, 2026 - March 1, 2026, Option_'Yes' surged from 18.5c to 30.5c. This was driven by pre-'Two Sessions' speculation regarding explosive leaked details of the Zhang case (such as reported nuclear secrets allegations), triggering a repricing.

This is a typical 'low-probability catastrophe' market. While asteroid impacts are a serious scientific topic, betting on a specific yield and year for a meteor strike is considered relatively niche and novel in mainstream prediction markets.

The market price implies an approximate 5% probability of occurrence, whereas the mainstream astronomical consensus places the annualized probability of such a magnitude event well below 1%. This significant divergence stems from retail investors in prediction markets overpaying for extreme tail risks (longshot bias).

There is potential confusion regarding the timeline. The title implies an upcoming 'July' (which readers might assume is the nearest one), but the rules specify June 30, 2026. Furthermore, the definition of 'backstop' is highly specific (explicit or legally binding loan guarantee), excluding tax credits or grants. This technical financial definition may conflict with vague media reporting, requiring careful verification of whether a 'debt transaction' is guaranteed.

This falls into the medium exotic category. OpenAI, a private company, seeking a direct government backstop for its debt is not standard practice. Although discussions are increasing given AI's status as a strategic national asset, this remains an unconventional financial/political event, less common than elections or earnings reports.

If OpenAI receives a government backstop, it signifies a direct state endorsement of its compute expansion, drastically lowering financing costs and accelerating capex. This is a direct positive for MSFT (OpenAI's main backer), reducing MSFT's own capex burden or risk exposure. It is also positive for NVDA (main hardware supplier), signaling guaranteed massive orders. Failure to secure a backstop could trigger fears of an AI bubble burst or unsustainable capex, creating negative sentiment for related tech stocks.

While a popular cultural topic, as a prediction market subject, it falls under entertainment/novelty rather than traditional finance or politics. It is somewhat exotic due to its reliance on subjective aesthetics and celebrity marketing dynamics.

The market pricing is severely divorced from reality. People's Sexiest Man Alive is traditionally awarded to a mainstream Hollywood A-lister. Assigning over 10% probability to fictional novel characters (Hudson Williams, Connor Storrie) is absurd and represents typical irrational speculation (or meme hype) within the prediction market, completely disconnected from any mainstream forecast or common sense.

This is a high-risk rule. The market requires Maduro not only to be arrested, extradited, and tried, but to be found guilty of *all* counts by a very tight deadline of Dec 31, 2027. Any acquittal on a single count, partial conviction, or mere delay (extremely common in international extradition and head-of-state trials) results in 'No'. The timeframe is incredibly short for such a complex international legal process, and the literal 'all counts' condition significantly narrows the winning path.

While a serious geopolitical topic, the scenario of Maduro standing trial in the US is highly speculative and hypothetical in the short term, given he remains the de facto ruler of Venezuela protected by the military. This makes it more 'exotic' or 'long-tail' than standard election predictions.

If Maduro is arrested and convicted (resulting in 'Yes'), it implies a drastic regime change in Venezuela, likely leading to significant shifts in the country's oil production and sanctions policy, directly impacting global crude supply expectations. Companies with operational licenses in Venezuela like Chevron (CVX) would also be affected. While the broader global shock might be absorbed by OPEC, it is a tradable geopolitical event.

The market currently prices a 'Yes' outcome at around 21.5%, but mainstream legal experts and analysts generally consider the actual probability of securing a final conviction on 'ALL counts' against a former foreign head of state within the specified timeframe (end of 2027) to be much lower (typically below 10%). Judicial delays, political interventions, and the highly common practice of plea bargaining (which usually results in some charges being dropped) make satisfying the market's strict rules exceedingly difficult, suggesting that speculative sentiment is still slightly overvaluing the probability.

The rules are complex as they depend not just on a personal action (haircut) but on a specific external trigger (Manchester United winning five consecutive games). If Man Utd fails to achieve this streak, the result is 'No' even if he cuts his hair. Additionally, the subjective definition of a 'substantial haircut' creates potential ambiguity.

This is a classic novelty market focusing on the intersection of a specific internet personality's personal grooming habits and sports results, which is highly obscure to anyone outside that niche.

The phrase 'offensive intended to establish control' is the critical and potentially ambiguous constraint. Military actions or special forces raids targeting cartels without the intent of holding land might not qualify, creating a gray area between political rhetoric and actual strategic objectives.

This is a fairly extreme political/military hypothetical. While rhetoric about 'bombing cartels' has existed in recent years, a full-scale US military invasion of an ally and neighbor to seize territorial control remains a very low-probability tail risk, making this a highly exotic topic.

If this event were to occur, it would be a geopolitical 'Black Swan' with devastating market consequences. The Mexican Peso (MXN) would collapse instantly. US equities would crash due to extreme uncertainty and trade disruption. Safe havens like Gold and Treasuries would rally sharply. This would fundamentally alter the economic landscape under the USMCA trade agreement.

Mainstream media and geopolitical experts generally consider the probability of the US annexing or occupying Mexican territory to be near zero. However, the prediction market assigns a 7.5% probability. This divergence is primarily because retail traders in the prediction market likely misinterpret aggressive political rhetoric about 'deploying the military against drug cartels' (which would not meet the territorial control resolution criteria) as a rule-qualifying 'territorial invasion'.

The rules are strict about word forms (allowing plurals/possessives but not other forms), which easily leads to disputes over tense variations or unclear pronunciations in spontaneous Q&A and official transcripts. Additionally, options with slashes (e.g., Crypto / Bitcoin) and specific counts (e.g., Inflation 50+ times) carry resolution risks due to potential discrepancies in counting methodologies.

Betting on the exact vocabulary or the specific frequency of a word (similar to a Bingo game) used by the Fed Chair during a press conference represents a novelty and entertainment-focused prediction market, rather than a traditional and rigorous macroeconomic policy forecast.

Although this specific market only predicts Powell's word choices, the underlying event (FOMC press conference) is a major macroeconomic catalyst. The frequency of the word 'inflation' or the mention of terms like 'tariff' and 'war' directly reflects the Fed's hawkish or dovish tone, which can trigger significant intraday volatility in the S&P 500, US 10Y Yield, and DXY.

April 9, 2026 - April 11, 2026, the price of 'War' surged from 41c to 54c, driven by escalating geopolitical tensions (likely in the Middle East or Eastern Europe), leading the market to expect journalists to ask about the macroeconomic and supply chain impacts of the war during the Q&A. April 5, 2026 - April 6, 2026, 'Governor' plummeted from 50.5c to 26.5c, and 'War' dropped from 56c to 31.5c. This was likely due to early speculative profit-taking and a shift in market focus toward domestic economic issues like AI and tariffs as the press conference was still weeks away.

Predicting the exact numerical bucket of posts a politician makes on a specific social media platform over a single week is highly granular and mostly functions as a degenerate betting market rather than a topic of serious mainstream interest.

April 13, 2026 - April 14, 2026, the 100-119 bracket rose from 34.5c to 45.5c, while the 80-99 bracket plummeted from 38.5c to 19.5c. This was caused by Trump's posting frequency remaining consistently high over the tracked period, dramatically increasing the likelihood of finishing in the 100-119 range and sharply reducing the chance of the 80-99 outcome. April 12, 2026 - April 13, 2026, the price of the 80-99 bracket plummeted from 38.5c to 21.5c, as Trump's actual posting frequency further accelerated, shifting market expectations towards higher brackets like 100-119 and 120-139. April 11, 2026 - April 13, 2026, the 80-99 bracket dropped from 39.5c to 26c, while the 120-139 bracket rose from 11c to 23.5c. This was caused by an accelerated posting frequency mid-cycle, shifting the projected total higher. April 10, 2026 - April 13, 2026, the 60-79 bracket dropped from 18.5c to 2.35c. This was caused by the continuous release of actual posting data over the first couple of days, where the pace made reaching such a low total highly unlikely, prompting a rapid capital exit. April 10, 2026 - April 11, 2026, the 140-159 bracket plunged from 12.15c to 2.2c. This was caused by the release of the first day's actual posting data, making a very high total unlikely and triggering a sell-off. April 7, 2026 - April 10, 2026, the 60-79 bracket dropped from 26.5c to 11c, the 120-139 bracket dropped from 26.5c to 15c, and the 140-159 bracket plunged from 26.5c to 4.5c. Multiple brackets initially shared an anomalously identical price (26.5c) due to early illiquidity. As market makers stepped in, a clearer consensus formed around the 80-119 range, causing outlier brackets to correct sharply downwards. April 7, 2026 - April 8, 2026, the 80-99 bracket surged from 30c to 42.5c, before settling back to around 35c on the 10th. This movement reflects an initial strong consensus on this median range, which later saw some capital shift towards adjacent high-probability brackets like 100-119.

'Half-Life 3' is the gaming industry's most famous vaporware meme. While not completely absurd given Valve is active, the question carries heavy meme status and entertainment value rather than standard business forecasting, given the decade-plus silence on a direct sequel.

April 11, 2026 - April 13, 2026, the price of Option_'Yes' spiked from 45c to 58.5c, driven by new datamines or prominent leaks circulating in the market, which triggered strong FOMO (Fear Of Missing Out) and an influx of speculative capital. April 1, 2026 - April 7, 2026, the price of Option_'Yes' fluctuated in an extremely narrow range between 50c and 50.5c, as the market entered a stalemate due to the lack of new information. March 24, 2026 - March 31, 2026, the price of Option_'Yes' slowly declined from 53.5c to 51.5c, because the continued lack of official news wore down the patience of early bulls, leading to a natural pullback due to time decay. March 19, 2026 - March 24, 2026, the price of Option_'Yes' consolidated narrowly between 51.5c and 53.5c, showing extreme stability. The lack of substantial official announcements left both bulls and bears unable to break the deadlock. March 4, 2026 - March 6, 2026, Option_'Yes' briefly spiked to 57c driven by unverified 'HLX' leak rumors on social media, but quickly corrected due to a lack of follow-up verification, indicating the market is hypersensitive yet lacks conviction in unconfirmed news.

Mainstream gaming media and industry experts remain highly skeptical that Valve will ever release a game explicitly titled 'Half-Life 3', maintaining that any new installment would likely use a subtitle (e.g., Alyx). However, the prediction market implies a nearly 60% probability of it happening, highlighting a significant divergence between the blind optimism of speculative capital and the cautious expectations of the mainstream press.