How the contract works
A contract on this market settles at $1 if the ceasefire holds through 15 November 2026 Iran Standard Time with no qualifying US strike, and at nothing if the United States conducts one before then. A qualifying strike is defined narrowly: an air strike with bombs, air-to-surface missiles or air-launched drones, or a surface-to-surface missile strike including one-way attack drones, cruise or ballistic missiles, that directly hits Iran. Interceptions, naval gunfire, ground incursions, cyber operations and minor loitering-munition or FPV drone strikes do not count, and a threat or authorization without execution does not count either. If a contract were priced at 0.30, for example, that would mean the market saw roughly a three-in-ten chance of a qualifying strike happening โ a hypothetical, not this market's figure. The question settles on 16 November 2026 based on verified reports of US military action, and a position can typically be sold before that date at whatever price the market shows then.
Yes49%
No51%
Probability
How the price has moved
The consensus figure of 60% comes from a single listed venue, Polymarket, with $302,386 in volume traded since the market opened. No breakdown of the move over the past day or week is available for this market, so the figures do not support a claim about recent momentum one way or the other. What can be said is that the market has settled near this level with meaningful volume behind it, which indicates genuine disagreement between buyers and sellers rather than a consensus near certainty in either direction.
Analysis
Context
The ceasefire being tested here traces back to June 2025, when the United States struck Iranian nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan during the broader Israel-Iran war, and a truce followed shortly after. That truce has technically held for over a year, through periodic flare-ups โ proxy attacks, naval incidents, and diplomatic breakdowns โ without a renewed direct US strike on Iranian territory. This market narrows the test to a specific four-week window, from mid-October to 15 November 2026, asking whether that pattern continues.
The actors that matter are the Trump administration, which controls the decision to strike; Iran's government, whose nuclear program and regional proxy network (Houthi forces in Yemen, militias in Iraq and Syria) can provoke a response; and Israel, whose own military actions against Iran could draw US forces in even without a US-initiated strike. The stakes extend beyond the two countries: a resumption of US strikes on Iran would reopen the question of Strait of Hormuz security, oil supply, and wider regional war.
The consensus across venues sits at 60%, drawn entirely from Polymarket, where $302,386 has traded since the market opened. That volume is modest for a geopolitical contract of this kind, and the fact that only one venue is listed means there is no cross-venue spread to read for disagreement โ the 60% figure is a single market's aggregated view rather than a consensus built from competing pools of money. That matters for how much weight to put on the number: it reflects the judgment of whoever is actively trading this specific contract, not a broad cross-section of institutional positioning.
The settlement language itself is a significant driver of where the price sits. By excluding intercepted munitions, naval gunfire, ground incursions, cyber operations and minor strikes, the rules set a relatively high bar for a No resolution. A great deal of friction short of a direct air or missile strike on Iranian soil โ proxy skirmishes, Israeli unilateral action, cyber sabotage โ can occur without triggering a No. That technical narrowness is one reason a 60% Yes reading is plausible even amid ongoing regional tension: many of the headlines that would alarm a casual reader would not actually qualify.
The precedent from June 2025 cuts the other way. The United States has already shown it will strike Iranian nuclear facilities directly when it judges the threshold crossed, and that strike came after a period of diplomacy that ultimately failed. If talks over Iran's enrichment program break down again in the coming weeks, or if a proxy attack kills US personnel in Iraq or Syria, the administration has a demonstrated recent willingness to act. The short window โ four weeks to the deadline โ limits how many such incidents can occur, but does not eliminate the possibility of one large one.
What moves the probability
Nuclear diplomacy track
Ongoing talks over Iran's uranium enrichment levels and IAEA access are the primary channel that keeps the ceasefire alive. A collapse in talks or a confirmed enrichment breach above agreed thresholds would push the probability of a strike up significantly.
Proxy attacks on US forces
Houthi, Iraqi, or Syrian militia attacks linked to Iran that kill US personnel have historically triggered direct US retaliation. Any such incident in the coming weeks is the most likely single trigger for a qualifying strike.
Israel-Iran friction
Independent Israeli military action against Iran could draw US air power into the conflict even without a US-initiated decision. This is a secondary but meaningful risk given the recent history of the two countries' confrontation.
Narrow resolution definition
The rules exclude naval gunfire, interceptions, ground incursions, cyber operations and minor drone strikes from counting as a No. This technical detail raises the bar for resolution and pushes the market toward Yes relative to a looser definition.
Short time window
The deadline falls on 15 November 2026, roughly four weeks from today. A narrower window mechanically reduces the number of chances for an escalation to occur before settlement.
The case for
- No qualifying US air strike or surface-to-surface missile strike against Iran occurs before 11:59 PM Iran Standard Time on 15 November 2026.
- The Trump administration continues to prioritize nuclear negotiations over renewed military action during this window.
- Iran avoids attacks on US personnel or interests that would be likely to trigger direct retaliation.
- The narrow definition of a qualifying strike means that lower-level friction, including naval incidents or proxy skirmishes, does not by itself resolve the question No.
The case against
- A confirmed breach of agreed enrichment limits, reported by the IAEA or US intelligence, could prompt a US strike before the deadline.
- A proxy attack that kills US troops in Iraq or Syria has historically been followed by direct US military retaliation.
- Escalating Israel-Iran confrontation could draw in US air power even without an independent US decision to strike.
- The precedent from June 2025, when diplomacy failed and the US struck Iranian nuclear facilities directly, shows the administration will act once it judges the threshold crossed.
What to watch
Between now and 15 November 2026, the key dates are any scheduled IAEA reporting on Iranian enrichment levels, statements from the Trump administration on the status of nuclear talks, and any reported attacks by Iran-aligned proxies on US forces in Iraq, Syria or the Gulf. Israeli military actions against Iranian targets are also relevant even though they do not themselves resolve the question. The market settles on 16 November 2026 based on verified reports of US military action against Iran in the preceding weeks.
Trade this contract
Open on Polymarket
- gas covered
- no trading fee