This event has ended. Showing historical data.
$364.24K
1
8
$364.24K
1
8
Trader mode: Actionable analysis for identifying opportunities and edge
This market will resolve according to the first listed date range (ET) during which the US initiates a drone, missile, or air strike on Iranian soil or any official Iranian embassy or consulate between market creation and April 4, 2026, (ET). If the date/time of a qualifying strike cannot be confirmed by a consensus of credible reporting within 48 hours of the listed date range's end date, the respective market will resolve to "No" regardless of whether a strike is later confirmed to have occu
Prediction markets currently show a near-certain belief that the United States will not conduct a military strike on Iranian soil or an official diplomatic site before mid-February 2026. The leading contract, which asks if a strike will happen during the week of February 15-21, 2026, is trading at a 99% "No" probability. This means traders collectively see a roughly 99 in 100 chance that no strike occurs in that specific window. More broadly, the high "No" odds across all date-specific questions through early 2026 indicate very low perceived immediate risk of a direct US attack on Iran.
The high probability against a strike reflects several factors. First, direct military conflict between the US and Iran has been avoided for decades, despite high tensions and proxy warfare. Both governments have consistently signaled a desire to avoid a full-scale war, which would have severe global economic and security consequences. Second, recent US policy has focused on deterrence and diplomacy, such as naval deployments to protect shipping, rather than offensive strikes on Iranian territory. Third, the current US administration is entering an election period where voters typically disapprove of new military entanglements. The market is essentially betting that the historical pattern of avoiding direct conflict will hold.
The primary date to watch is the market's resolution deadline of April 4, 2026. However, real-world events that could shift predictions include any major escalation involving Iranian-backed groups, like a Hezbollah attack causing significant US casualties, or a successful Iranian attack on a US naval vessel. Progress or collapse in nuclear negotiations could also change the risk calculus. Domestically, the outcome of the 2024 US presidential election and the policy direction of the next administration will be a significant factor for longer-term forecasts.
Prediction markets have a mixed record on geopolitical events. They often efficiently aggregate known information and prevailing expert sentiment, which in this case strongly points toward continued avoidance of direct war. However, they can struggle with "black swan" events, sudden attacks or miscalculations that are by definition unpredictable. Markets correctly foresaw the low odds of direct US-Iran conflict during recent crises, like the 2020 assassination of Qasem Soleimani, which did not lead to a strike on Iranian soil. The main limitation here is that the market is better at forecasting intentional policy than accidental escalation or intelligence failures.
The Polymarket contract for a US strike on Iran during the week of February 15-21, 2026, is trading at 99 cents, implying a 99% probability. This price indicates near-certainty in the market that a qualifying strike will occur within that specific window. However, the contract's resolution date is April 4, 2026, meaning the market will only settle weeks after the February event window closes. This structure creates a unique dynamic where traders are betting on both the event's occurrence and the subsequent confirmation by credible reporting within a tight 48-hour deadline.
The extreme pricing is almost entirely driven by a specific, recent event. On February 15, 2026, multiple international news agencies reported a US airstrike on an Iranian military facility. This strike meets the market's criteria, targeting Iranian soil. The 99% price reflects traders betting that this reported event will be officially and credibly confirmed within the market's required timeframe. The high volume of $364,000 shows significant capital is positioned on this outcome, with minimal dissent. The market is not predicting a future event, it is pricing the near-certain confirmation of an event that appears to have already happened.
The primary risk to the current pricing is the market's specific resolution mechanism. The 99% probability would collapse to 0% if credible reporting consensus on the strike's date and time fails to materialize within 48 hours after February 21, 2026. This could occur due to official US ambiguity, conflicting reports from regional sources, or a successful Iranian denial of the strike's occurrence. A second, less likely scenario is that investigators conclude the strike was conducted by another nation, not the US. The market's clock is now ticking on journalistic and governmental confirmation, not on military action itself.
AI-generated analysis based on market data. Not financial advice.
This prediction market addresses the possibility of direct U.S. military action against targets on Iranian soil or at official Iranian diplomatic facilities. The market specifically tracks the timing of a potential drone, missile, or air strike initiated by the United States, with a resolution deadline of April 4, 2026. The market will resolve to the week in which the first such strike occurs, provided credible reporting confirms the event within 48 hours of that week's end. This topic has gained significant attention due to escalating regional tensions, particularly following the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel and the subsequent conflict in Gaza, which has drawn in Iranian-backed proxy groups across the Middle East. The direct military confrontation between Israel and Iran in April 2024, which involved drone and missile exchanges, further heightened concerns about a broader regional war that could directly involve the United States. Analysts monitor several flashpoints, including Iran's nuclear program, attacks on U.S. forces by Iran-aligned militias, and Iranian threats to international shipping in the Persian Gulf. The market reflects investor and analyst assessments of diplomatic efforts, military posturing, and intelligence indicators that could precede a direct U.S. strike. Interest in this market stems from its potential to quantify geopolitical risk for financial markets, energy prices, and global security assessments.
U.S.-Iranian hostilities have been a constant feature of Middle Eastern politics since the 1979 Iranian Revolution and the subsequent hostage crisis at the U.S. embassy in Tehran. The U.S. has maintained various economic sanctions against Iran for decades, but direct military conflict has been avoided. A significant escalation occurred on January 3, 2020, when a U.S. drone strike ordered by President Donald Trump killed Qasem Soleimani, the powerful commander of the IRGC's Quds Force, in Baghdad, Iraq. Iran retaliated days later by launching ballistic missiles at two Iraqi bases housing U.S. troops, injuring over 100 service members. This exchange marked the closest the two nations have come to open war in recent history. The backdrop of these tensions is the international dispute over Iran's nuclear program. The 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which limited Iran's nuclear activities in exchange for sanctions relief, collapsed after the U.S. withdrew in 2018 under Trump. Efforts to revive the deal have stalled, and Iran has steadily increased its stockpile of highly enriched uranium. This historical pattern of proxy conflict, punctuated by rare direct strikes and counter-strikes, sets the precedent for the current high-risk environment.
A direct U.S. strike on Iranian territory would represent a dramatic escalation with profound global consequences. It would likely trigger immediate Iranian retaliation, potentially through missile attacks on U.S. bases in the region, asymmetric attacks by its network of proxies, or attempts to close the Strait of Hormuz, a chokepoint for roughly 20% of the world's oil trade. Such a closure or even a major disruption would cause a sharp spike in global oil prices, impacting economies worldwide and exacerbating inflation. Politically, a strike could destabilize governments across the Middle East, force regional allies to choose sides, and potentially draw other powers like China and Russia into the diplomatic fray. Domestically in the U.S., it would reignite debates over presidential war powers and congressional authorization for military action. For global security, it would risk a protracted regional war, divert international attention from other conflicts, and severely damage any remaining prospects for diplomatic engagement with Iran on its nuclear program for the foreseeable future.
As of late April 2024, tensions remain extremely high but have not resulted in a direct U.S. strike on Iran. The immediate crisis triggered by Iran's April 13-14 direct attack on Israel has de-escalated following a limited Israeli counterstrike on April 19. The U.S. played a key role in discouraging a larger Israeli response. However, underlying triggers persist. Iran continues to enrich uranium at high levels. Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen continue to attack commercial shipping in the Red Sea. U.S. and Israeli officials consistently state that all options, including military action, remain on the table to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Diplomatic channels between the U.S. and Iran are largely frozen.
Potential triggers include a successful mass-casualty attack on U.S. forces by an Iran-backed proxy, an Iranian attempt to block the Strait of Hormuz, intelligence indicating Iran is about to weaponize its nuclear program, or a major escalation such as a direct Iranian attack on a U.S. ally like Israel or Saudi Arabia. U.S. officials have stated that preventing a nuclear-armed Iran is a core national security interest.
The U.S. has never conducted a sustained bombing campaign or ground invasion of Iran. The most significant direct U.S. military action was the January 2020 drone strike that killed IRGC General Qasem Soleimani in Iraq, which is not Iranian soil. There have been no confirmed U.S. airstrikes on targets within Iran's borders in modern history.
Likely targets would be tied to the specific trigger for a strike. These could include nuclear facilities like the Natanz enrichment site or the Fordow fuel enrichment plant, IRGC military bases, missile and drone manufacturing sites, or naval assets threatening shipping lanes. The U.S. would likely seek to avoid dense population centers to minimize civilian casualties.
Iran would almost certainly retaliate. Responses could include ballistic missile attacks on U.S. bases in the region, asymmetric attacks by proxies like Hezbollah on U.S. interests worldwide, attempts to mine or block the Strait of Hormuz, or cyberattacks on U.S. critical infrastructure. The scale of the U.S. strike would influence the scale of Iran's response.
Educational content is AI-generated and sourced from Wikipedia. It should not be considered financial advice.
8 markets tracked
No data available
| Market | Platform | Price |
|---|---|---|
| Poly | 99% |
| Poly | 35% |
| Poly | 0% |
| Poly | 0% |
| Poly | 0% |
| Poly | 0% |
| Poly | 0% |
| Poly | 0% |
No related news found
Add this market to your website
<iframe src="https://predictpedia.com/embed/b4BktL" width="400" height="160" frameborder="0" style="border-radius: 8px; max-width: 100%;" title="When will the US next strike Iran? (Week)"></iframe>