AI Signal Dashboard
Last updated: 05.19 08:44
Top Undervalued
+46¢
↓ $875B(Yes)
+32¢
↑ $925B(No)
+31.5¢
↑ $950B(No)
Will Anthropic’s valuation hit __ by June 30? AI analysis: • +46¢ undervalued • Live Prediction Market fair value & mispricing alerts.
Undervalued Options Insights:
Current market pricing exhibits extreme logical inversion (e.g., Yes price for ↑ $1.1T is only 10.5c...
🔓 Log in to see more
Real-time High Yield Opportunities
View MoreAll
Outcomes
Market
Price
AI Fair
Value
Value
Edge
↓ $875B
YesNo
11¢
89¢
57¢
43¢
+46¢
0¢
↑ $925B
YesNo
99.95¢
0.05¢
68¢
32¢
0¢
+32¢
Expand to view all 12 options
⚠️ Risk Warning: Live data may lag! Prices can shift instantly due to news or low liquidity. Before trading, use AI Chat for [Live Recalculate], [Check Liquidity], [Trollbox Radar], or review [Fair Value Logic] to verify.
Rule Risk
The rules for this market have some complexity. First, it relies on private market valuation data from Nasdaq Private Market (NPM) and specifies data publication delays. Second, if an IPO or direct listing occurs, the resolution criteria switch to public market capitalization and IPO implied valuation. If the company is acquired and is no longer the parent, only pre-transaction valuations are considered. These complex conditional transitions could lead to misunderstandings of the resolution criteria.
Hedging
GOOGL
AMZN
If Anthropic's valuation reaches the near-trillion-dollar level, it reflects explosive growth in the generative AI sector. As major investors in Anthropic, Google (GOOGL) and Amazon (AMZN) would directly benefit from its valuation inflation. Meanwhile, Microsoft (MSFT), as OpenAI's main backer, could be indirectly affected by shifts in the competitive landscape. An AI startup valuation of this magnitude could also have some spillover effect on the overall sentiment of the Nasdaq 100 index.
Divergence
There is a severe internal logical divergence in the market. The implied probability of a higher valuation target like $1.25T (49%) is inexplicably much higher than that of a lower target like $1.1T (10.5%), which is mathematically impossible. This divergence indicates that certain illiquid options lack market makers or sufficient active trading to keep prices anchored to reality.