What Prediction Markets Are Forecasting

Prediction markets currently give about a 3 in 4 chance that the United States will not acquire Greenland during a potential second Trump term. This means traders collectively see a purchase as unlikely. The leading market question, which asks if there will be no acquisition, is trading at a 77% probability. In simpler terms, if you could run this scenario 100 times, the collective wisdom of thousands of traders suggests Greenland would remain Danish in about 77 of those futures.

Why the Market Sees It This Way

The high probability against a sale stems from several clear obstacles. First, Greenland’s government and its people have repeatedly and firmly stated the island is not for sale. In 2019, after news broke of President Trump’s interest, Greenland’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs bluntly said, “Greenland is not for sale.” Local sentiment strongly favors greater independence from Denmark, not a transfer to another power.

Second, while Denmark administers Greenland’s defense and foreign policy, it cannot force a sale against the will of Greenland’s elected government. Such a move would create a major diplomatic crisis. Historical context matters here. The U.S. did buy territory from Denmark before, acquiring the Danish West Indies (now the U.S. Virgin Islands) in 1917. However, that was a colonial possession with a different political status. Greenland today has a self-governing parliament that would need to approve any change in sovereignty, making a transaction far more complex than a simple bilateral deal.

Finally, the financial and political cost would be enormous. A price tag would likely need to be in the hundreds of billions of dollars to be considered, given Greenland’s strategic size and resources. Markets likely doubt that such a colossal expenditure, with its attendant political controversy, would be a feasible priority.

Key Dates and Events to Watch

The main event is the U.S. presidential election on November 5, 2024. A Trump victory is a necessary precondition for this scenario to even be possible. Following an election, any formal diplomatic overtures from the U.S. to Denmark would be a major signal. Listen for statements from the Greenlandic government in Nuuk or the Danish government in Copenhagen rejecting or engaging with the idea. The annual Arctic Circle Assembly in Reykjavik, a major gathering of Arctic policymakers, is also a forum where related tensions or discussions could surface.

How Reliable Are These Predictions?

Markets are generally reliable at aggregating known political constraints and public statements, which form the basis of this forecast. They are good at assessing the likelihood of events that face clear, stated opposition from key decision-makers. The main limitation here is the unpredictable nature of a potential second Trump administration’s foreign policy priorities. If a re-elected president made an unexpectedly compelling or aggressive offer, the dynamics could shift, though the fundamental barrier of local consent would remain. Markets currently judge that barrier as very strong.