Prediction markets put the probability at 28%: US x Iran permanent peace deal by May 31, 2026. Currently, markets see this as unlikely (28% YES). What to Know About U.S.-Iran Peace Talks - The New York Times.
The probability of a US x Iran permanent peace deal by May 31, 2026 currently stands at 28% YES, reflecting deep uncertainty after President Trump abruptly canceled a planned trip by two top negotiators to Islamabad, Pakistan, on April 26. The cancellation came just hours before the envoys were set to depart for talks aimed at ending the war, with the New York Times reporting that Iran has publicly rejected peace negotiations and that both sides remain far from a framework agreement. This diplomatic setback follows weeks of mixed signals: on April 21, Trump claimed on media that Iranian leaders had “agreed to everything,” including the removal of enriched uranium and a pledge never to close the Strait of Hormuz, but Tehran immediately denied any such concessions, insisting it would not negotiate under threat of a U.S. ultimatum. [NYT, Apr 26]
The core obstacle remains the expiration of the current ceasefire, which Trump has said will lapse on May 1, 2026, leaving only a narrow window for a breakthrough. According to Reuters, U.S. officials expressed optimism about a potential deal as of April 21, but acknowledged that talks remain uncertain as Pakistan prepared to host the second phase of negotiations in Islamabad. Meanwhile, Iran has rejected Trump’s demands to accept U.S. terms, and both sides accuse each other of violating the ceasefire terms. The Times reported on April 20 that oil prices jumped and markets retreated as the peace deal’s viability was shrouded in doubt, highlighting the economic stakes tied to any US x Iran permanent peace deal by May 31, 2026. [Reuters, Apr 21]
The structural factor that will determine resolution is whether the U.S. and Iran can bridge fundamental disagreements over nuclear enrichment and regional military posture before the ceasefire deadline. CBS News reported on April 21 that Trump expects to “end up with a great deal,” arguing Tehran has “no choice” but to negotiate, while Iran’s regime insists it has no plans to attend the Pakistan talks. Heather Cox Richardson noted on April 21 that Trump’s public declarations of a breakthrough were contradicted by media outlets questioning the alleged deal’s substance. With the ceasefire set to expire in days and no new talks scheduled, the probability of a US x Iran permanent peace deal by May 31, 2026 hinges on whether either side blinks first — or whether the conflict escalates into renewed hostilities. [CBS News, Apr 21]
Active market on Polymarket with $6.8M in total volume. Sufficient liquidity for most position sizes. Currently priced at 28c YES.
What does smart money think? Get AI verdicts, wallet positioning, signal analysis, and entry targets.
Unlock PRO — $29/moSmart money wallets positioned YES, but 6/7 models estimate NO. Signals conflict — waiting for consolidation.
| Model | Says | Fair Value estimated fair price | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| MATH PIN Model | NO | 75c | — |
| MATH Compound Signal | NO | 59c | — |
| AI Claude Analysis | NO | 91c | 88% |
| AI DeepSeek Quant | NO | 82c | 72% |
| AI Grok Contrarian | NO | 85c | 70% |
| AI Gemini Flash | ??? | 35c | 60% |
| AI Kimi Macro | NO | 72c | 67% |
6 of 7 models estimate NO fair value above market (59–91c vs 72c). Claude Analysis leads with 88% confidence.
Models estimate fair value of NO at 77c — market prices it at 72c. 5-point gap supports NO.
Smart money NO positions are fully validated and entered at favorable 35c-43c levels, while YES capital is fragmented across a wide 27c-52c range suggesting conviction-light accumulation. The entry distribution favors continued downside or range-bound action below 30c — directional signal points to NO continuation absent a concrete diplomatic catalyst before May 31.
| Wallet | Category | Side | Amount | P&L | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0xb8e6..67 | Smart | YES | $1.1K | -44% | |
| 0xbacd..35 | MM | NO | $36.5K | +45% | |
| 0xc658..84 | MM | YES | $25.1K | -46% | |
| 0x12d6..a8 | MM | NO | $11.7K | +64% | |
| 0xde7b..4b | MM | NO | $8.5K | +86% | |
| 0x162f..8d | MM | YES | $8.0K | -47% | |
| 0x7c3d..6b | MM | YES | $5.5K | -34% | |
| 0xd039..32 | MM | YES | $5.5K | +2% | |
| 0xeec5..fe | Retail | YES | $2.0K | -44% | |
| 0xe25b..1b | MM | YES | $1.1K | -24% |
Despite YES being the dominant side, only 14% of YES holders are in profit at 28c, with entries spanning 27c-52c — meaning most YES bettors are underwater. NO holders entered at 35c-43c and 100% are in profit, signaling NO has been the correct trade as price compressed lower. Current 28c offers thin support given the heavy unprofitable YES book overhead.
Polymarket prices YES at 28c with $6.8M in total volume. Our model estimates fair value at 23c. 5-point gap suggests market may undervalue NO.
| Platform | YES Price | Volume |
|---|---|---|
| Polymarket | 28c | $6.8M |
| Our Model | 23c | — |