Iran commits not to attack ships in Hormuz by Sunday?

Platform comparison

Market context

Iran faces a direct US demand to publicly guarantee it will cease attacks on shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, yet the regime has historically treated the waterway as sovereign territory it will never fully relinquish. The crowd-implied probability of 2% for a formal commitment reflects this entrenched stance, positioning Iran as the heavy underdog in this binary outcome. While the consensus correctly identifies the near-zero likelihood of Tehran voluntarily surrendering leverage over the strait, the contrarian angle lies in whether escalating US sanctions or imminent military pressure could force a rare, declarative policy shift before the settlement deadline.

Historical precedents show Iran routinely issues conditional transit permissions—such as allowing "non-hostile" vessels while barring US or Israeli-linked ships—rather than blanket non-aggression pledges. Recent IRGC actions, including the capture and attack of cargo ships like the MSC Francesca, underscore a pattern of asserting control through coercion rather than diplomatic guarantees [2]. Ebrahim Azizi, a senior lawmaker, has explicitly stated Iran would "never" relinquish authority over the strait, reinforcing the structural barrier to a "Yes" resolution [2].

Traders should monitor the scheduled US-Iran talks in Switzerland, where Washington is insisting on a public commitment to end attacks and keep lanes open [6][8]. Any deviation from Iran’s standard conditional language toward an unambiguous, unconditional pledge would be a market-moving anomaly. However, given Tehran’s recent insistence that reopening the strait is "impossible" without a US blockade end, the catalyst for a qualifying announcement remains absent [2]. The value spot sits firmly on "No," as the 2% price likely overstates the chance of a genuine policy reversal.

Sources: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5

Methodology

We track Iran commits not to attack ships in Hormuz by Sunday? across the five venues with material prediction-market liquidity. The probability shown is the live Polymarket mid; the comparison rows summarise how each venue treats the underlying contract — fees, KYC thresholds, settlement currency, deposit options. The highlighted row marks the cheapest route into Polymarket's order book.

Resolution & payout

Settlement runs on-chain. Polymarket's contract logic separates YES and NO shares as conditional tokens; at resolution the winning share lifts to $1.00 and the losing one to $0. The outcome input comes from the UMA Optimistic Oracle, which secures against bad resolution with a bond + dispute window.

Once finalised, the smart contract pays USDC to the holders' wallets within minutes — no withdrawal fees beyond Polygon network gas. Kalshi settles in USD via CFTC clearance, Betfair in account currency net of commission, Manifold in play-money mana with no cash-out.

FAQ

Is this market available outside the US?

Polymarket itself is geo-blocked in the US/UK/EU. Always check the legal status of prediction markets in your jurisdiction before trading.

How does resolution work?

Through the UMA Optimistic Oracle on Polygon: a proposer submits the outcome, a two-hour challenge window opens, and USDC payouts settle automatically once the result is final.

What's the difference between YES and NO shares?

A YES share pays $1.00 if the event happens, $0 otherwise. A NO share pays $1.00 if the event doesn't happen. The market price between 0¢ and 100¢ is the implied probability.

Do I need to KYC for this market?

On Polymarket directly, no — it's wallet-based. Intermediary brokers like Who Will Win trigger KYC only above $1,500 of lifetime trading volume; under that you trade pseudonymously with a single wallet address.

How reliable are the quoted odds?

The YES/NO percentages are the live mid-prices of the Polymarket order book. On deep markets they move every few seconds; on thinner ones you'll see short plateaus.