All
Outcomes
Market
Price
AI Fair
Value
Value
Edge
0
YesNo
1k-2.5k
YesNo
101-1k
YesNo
1-100
YesNo
2.5k-5k
YesNo
25k-100k
YesNo
>100k
YesNo
10k-25k
YesNo
5k-10k
YesNo
AI Insights:
03.15 22:23 UpdatedFair Value Reasoning:
The current market total price is ~93-94c, indicating slight undervaluation. Given the exorbitant $5 million price tag per 'Gold Card', economic reality limits demand, and legal challenges are highly likely to stall the program or result in zero sales, making '0' and '1-100' the highest fair value brackets (combined 50c). However, market pricing includes significant 'Official Source Risk'—the fear that the Trump administration will release inflated sales figures to resolve the market via the 'Resolution Source' rule. This supports prices in the mid-to-high ranges (e.g., 2.5k-5k and 10k-25k). My fair value model respects this risk but weighs economic rationality (high price, low volume) and legal hurdles (0 sales) more heavily, thus assigning higher weight to the lower brackets, summing to 100.
Sign up to view more information
Arbitrage|Direct Arb
Arbitrage Plan:
Buy the Field Strategy: Buy 'Yes' on all 9 options individually. Since this covers the entire range of outcomes from 0 to infinity, it is a guaranteed winning combination assuming normal market resolution.
Plan Description:
The sum of all 'Yes' prices is currently ~93.75 cents. This means you can cover every possible outcome for less than $1. If held to maturity (~290 days), you will receive a payout of $1. This offers an absolute return of ~6.25%, or ~8% annualized. This is a 'Risk-free' arbitrage; the only risks are platform default or extremely anomalous resolution rules (e.g., negative numbers, which is impossible here).Sign up to view more information
Arbitrage: 6¢
|Annualized yield: 8.05%
Rule Risk
The rules define 'Gold Card' broadly, encompassing not just the specific name but any new program established after Feb 26, 2025, exchanging funds for status. While inclusive, this introduces ambiguity: for instance, would minor modifications to the existing EB-5 program count as a 'new program'? Or if multiple tiered programs exist, how are they aggregated? Furthermore, potential opacity in official data may force reliance on media consensus, which might differ on the definition of 'sales' (actual payment vs. letters of intent).
Exotics
Selling citizenship is practiced in some Caribbean nations but is a highly unconventional and controversial concept for the United States. Although Trump has mentioned the idea, it remains a political spectacle. There is a massive cognitive gap in mainstream society regarding whether such a policy could actually be implemented and scaled, making this a highly novel political derivative market.
Divergence
There is a significant divergence. Mainstream legal experts and immigration analysts widely believe that selling citizenship for $5 million faces immense constitutional challenges and lacks a large-scale economic market (compared to EB-5 or similar global programs), making '0' or very low volume ('1-100') the most probable rational outcomes. However, the prediction market pricing assigns considerable weight (over 20% combined probability) to high-volume brackets (e.g., >10k). This divergence stems from the fact that the market is predicting not just the 'truth,' but the 'official data released by the Trump administration,' creating a 'Trump Premium' or 'Official Lie Hedge.'
