How the contract works
A contract on this question settles at $1 if neither Israel nor Iran carries out a qualifying air strike or surface-to-surface missile strike against the other before the resolution deadline, and at $0 if such a strike occurs. Interceptions, naval or artillery fire, cyber operations, ground incursions and minor or short-range strikes do not count under the rules, so the contract can still resolve Yes even if lower-level friction continues. The price at any moment reflects what traders collectively think the chance of that outcome is: a contract trading at $0.30, for example, would imply a market view of roughly a three-in-ten chance the ceasefire breaks before the deadline. The question settles on 5 November 2026 based on verified reports covering the period through 4 November 2026, 11:59 PM Iran Standard Time, and a position in it can be sold before that settlement at whatever price the market shows at the time.
Yes99%
No1%
Probability
How the price has moved
The current consensus of 94% on $357,514 of volume reflects a market pricing continuation of the ceasefire as highly likely, with no reported qualifying strike by either side feeding into that figure. Markets of this recurring daily structure typically hold near their upper range for extended periods while the truce is intact, since the question resets each day rather than carrying forward a running history of near-misses. Without evidence of a specific news trigger behind the current level, the fairest reading is that the price simply tracks the continued absence of a confirmed Israeli or Iranian strike, and any sharp move would most plausibly follow a specific reported incident rather than a change in general sentiment.
Analysis
Context
Israel and Iran fought a direct, 12-day exchange of air strikes and missiles in June 2025, their first open war after decades of shadow conflict through proxies and covert strikes. A ceasefire took hold afterward, reportedly with US involvement in pressing both sides to stop, and it has held since, with periodic concerns about nuclear-site inspections, proxy activity in Lebanon and Syria, and statements from officials in Tehran and Jerusalem that have at times suggested renewed readiness to strike. This market is one of a recurring daily series on Polymarket that asks, in effect, whether the truce survived another 24 hours without a qualifying strike; each day's version resolves and a new one opens, so the question is less about a single dramatic turning point and more about whether the pattern of restraint continues to hold.
The consensus across the one venue tracking this question, Polymarket, sits at 94%, on volume of $357,514. That is a high level of confidence for a geopolitical question involving two states that fought an open war within recent memory, and it reflects the fact that the underlying event this market asks about is narrow: not whether tension exists, but whether either side has launched a qualifying air or missile strike in a specific 24-hour-to-week window. Because the rules explicitly exclude interceptions, naval incidents, cyber operations and short-range or minor strikes, the bar for a No resolution is deliberately high, and that structural narrowness is itself a large part of why the price sits where it does rather than closer to a coin flip.
With only one venue currently pricing the question, there is no cross-market spread to read for disagreement, which is itself informative: a single liquid market at 94% suggests traders see limited ambiguity about the near-term outcome rather than a genuine split in expectations. The pattern typical of this kind of recurring daily market is that the price stays pinned near its ceiling for long stretches whenever the ceasefire is holding, then drops sharply and immediately on confirmed news of a strike, rather than drifting gradually. That means the current reading says more about the absence of reported strikes up to now than it does about any specific forecast for the days ahead.
The actual risk to the ceasefire runs through a small number of channels: Israeli assessments of Iran's nuclear program and any perceived violation of post-war understandings on inspections or enrichment; Iranian-aligned proxy activity in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq or Yemen that could trigger a direct Israeli response against Iranian territory; and domestic political pressure in either country to respond to an earlier provocation. None of these is captured directly in the 94% figure, but all of them are the reason the price is not higher still.
What moves the probability
Nuclear-site inspections
Disputes over International Atomic Energy Agency access to Iranian facilities are the most direct trigger for renewed Israeli strikes, since Israel has previously cited the nuclear program as its reason for the June 2025 campaign. Any reported obstruction of inspectors or evidence of renewed high-level enrichment would push the probability down.
Proxy and regional activity
Strikes attributed to Iranian-backed groups in Lebanon, Syria or Iraq, or against Israeli or US assets in the region, raise the chance of an Israeli response directed at Iran itself. This indirect route is harder to monitor than a direct strike but has historically been how prior rounds of escalation began.
US diplomatic posture
Continued US involvement in enforcing the truce, including any statements from Washington warning either side against unilateral action, supports the high probability. A shift in US attention or an explicit US signal tolerating an Israeli strike would be read as loosening that constraint.
Political pressure in Tehran and Jerusalem
Domestic calls for retaliation following any perceived provocation, assassination, or sabotage incident attributed to the other side can shift government posture quickly. This is the most unpredictable driver, since it depends on events that have not yet occurred.
The case for
- No Israeli or Iranian air strike or surface-to-surface missile strike against the other has been confirmed since the ceasefire took hold after the June 2025 conflict.
- The resolution rules exclude interceptions, naval fire, cyber operations and minor or short-range strikes, narrowing the path to a No outcome considerably.
- Continued US diplomatic engagement has so far been credited with keeping both sides from authorizing a strike.
- The pattern on this recurring daily market has been one of the price staying near its ceiling whenever no qualifying strike has been reported.
The case against
- Israel has previously struck Iranian nuclear infrastructure directly and has stated it would do so again if it judged the program to be advancing.
- Proxy activity involving Iranian-aligned groups in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq or Yemen could prompt an Israeli strike on Iranian territory without warning.
- A single confirmed strike by either side before 11:59 PM Iran Standard Time on 4 November 2026 resolves the question No regardless of how brief the prior calm was.
- Domestic political pressure in either country following an unrelated incident could shift official posture faster than diplomatic channels can contain it.
What to watch
The key dates between now and the 5 November 2026 settlement are any scheduled International Atomic Energy Agency reporting on Iranian nuclear facilities, any Israeli military statements regarding Iranian-aligned proxy activity in Lebanon or Syria, and any US State Department or White House readouts referencing enforcement of the truce. Because this question resolves on a short, near-term window, the relevant triggers are immediate reported events rather than long-range diplomatic processes.
Trade this contract
Open on Polymarket
- gas covered
- no trading fee