All
Outcomes
Market
Price
AI Fair
Value
Value
Edge
June 30
YesNo
March 31
YesNo
AI Insights:
03.17 17:13 UpdatedFair Value Reasoning:
Current date is March 17, 2026. For the March 31 option, with only 14 days remaining, global OSINT has detected zero signs of large-scale US military buildup (e.g., hospital ships, forward ammo depots). The rules strictly require 'active US military' to enter 'terrestrial territory,' excluding airstrikes or naval blockades. Physically initiating an invasion within two weeks is logistically impossible; this option is effectively zero (1c reserved only for extreme black swan events). For the June 30 option, the 22.5c price implies a 22.5% probability of invasion, which is completely divorced from the current US strategy of 'judicial pressure + sanctions + proxies.' The persistent premium stems from conflating 'military contractors/mercenaries (e.g., Erik Prince rumors)' with 'active duty US military,' the latter being strictly required by the rules. Fair value should be around 5c (retaining only tail risk).
Sign up to view more information
Exotics
This is a plausible geopolitical prediction given the history of US-Venezuela tensions, but it is not a daily mainstream topic and carries a somewhat extreme assumption (military intervention).
Hedging
Crude Oil
CVX
Gold
US forces entering Venezuela would be a major geopolitical event, directly impacting global crude oil supply expectations (given Venezuela's vast reserves) and causing oil prices to spike. Oil majors with operations in the region, like Chevron (CVX), would face direct volatility. Gold would likely rise as a safe haven, while broader indices might suffer minor negative sentiment due to increased uncertainty.
Divergence
Significant divergence exists. The prediction market pricing (22.5% for June 30) implies a nearly 1-in-4 chance of a US ground invasion, whereas mainstream geopolitical analysis and DoD public posturing indicate a preference for non-kinetic (sanctions, indictments) or non-official (private military contractors) means. Market participants appear to be trading the macro concept of 'regime change efforts' while ignoring the specific contract rule requiring 'active duty US military,' leading to inflated prices.
