US x Iran Effective Ceasefire by...? (2 week pause)
Yes refers to: August 31
Short Answer
Both the model and the market expect an effective US-Iran ceasefire by August 31, with no compelling evidence of mispricing.
1. Executive Verdict
- US President's August 1–2 strike suspension drives high effective ceasefire probability.
- August 14 ceasefire faces timing uncertainty from the August 1–2 pause announcement.
- Qatari, Omani, Pakistani diplomacy appears to advance short-term ceasefire efforts.
Who Wins and Why
| Outcome | Market | Model | Why |
|---|---|---|---|
| August 31 | 82.0% | 82.7% | The US President announced a suspension of military strikes around August 1–2, 2026, supporting a ceasefire. |
Current Context
US military strikes paused amid conflicting claims of a deal. As of August 4, 2026, no formal or long-term ceasefire exists between the US and Iran [^]. The US paused planned military strikes around August 1-2, 2026, following requests from regional leaders, including the Saudi Crown Prince and Emir of Qatar, seeking de-escalation [^]. President Trump stated that a "deal" to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and end Iran's nuclear threat was within reach, asserting negotiations were underway [^]. However, the Iranian government publicly denies any direct talks with the US, only acknowledging discussions with Oman regarding the Strait of Hormuz [^].
Previous ceasefire attempts have repeatedly failed over key disagreements. Conflict between the United States and Iran began on February 28, 2026. A two-week US-initiated ceasefire commenced on April 7, 2026, which was subsequently extended [^]. On June 17, 2026, the US and Iran signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) intended to resolve tensions and reopen the Strait of Hormuz [^]. This agreement proved temporary; military hostilities resumed following Iranian attacks on commercial vessels in late June and early July 2026. Analysts warn that previous ceasefire attempts, including this MoU, failed due to disagreements over the Strait of Hormuz and nuclear program constraints, suggesting the current pause may be another temporary lull rather than a durable peace [^]. Intermittent ceasefires between May and June 2026 caused significant volatility in global crude oil prices, which initially spiked [^].
US continues targeted operations, long-term peace remains uncertain. The United States continues to conduct targeted military operations against Iranian military assets as of August 4, 2026, following renewed attacks in July [^]. US officials have stated that Iran repeatedly broke previous interim peace deals and commitments to ceasefires [^]. President Trump indicated that diplomatic negotiations for a long-term peace agreement remain uncertain [^].
2. Market Behavior & Price Dynamics
Historical Price (Probability)
Outcome probability
Date
This market's price action has been entirely event-driven, showing extreme volatility in response to geopolitical news. The contract trended sharply downward in late July, with the probability dropping from 53.5% on July 28 to a low of 9.0% by July 31. This decline was driven by reports, including one from Bloomberg Businessweek on July 24, indicating that peace talks were unlikely and military attacks were continuing. The price bottomed out as the July 31 date passed without a confirmed ceasefire.
A sharp reversal began in early August. The probability spiked 37.0 points on August 2, likely a reaction to President Trump’s July 31 statement that "new Iran talks should begin." This was followed by another 24.0 point spike on August 4, pushing the price to 75.5%, after reports that the U.S. had suspended planned military strikes. This de-escalation was reportedly influenced by requests from regional leaders.
The total traded volume for this contract is zero. This indicates the price movements are not the result of trader activity or capital being deployed. Instead, the chart reflects price adjustments based on news flow. As a result, standard technical indicators like support and resistance levels are not applicable. The current price of 75.5% suggests a high market-implied probability of a ceasefire, but this sentiment is not supported by any trading conviction.
3. Significant Price Movements
Notable price changes detected in the chart, along with research into what caused each movement.
📈 August 04, 2026: 24.0pp spike
Price increased from 51.5% to 75.5%
Outcome: July 31
What happened: The primary driver of the prediction market spike was President Donald Trump's announcement around August 1–2, 2026, that he officially suspended planned U.S. military strikes on Iran, stating he is awaiting a "rapid" deal [^]. This significant de-escalation, reportedly influenced by requests from regional powers for a diplomatic pause, caused the market to re-evaluate the likelihood of an "effective ceasefire" or "2-week pause" by July 31, leading to the 24.0 percentage point spike observed by August 4, 2026 [^]. No specific social media activity from key figures or viral narratives appeared to drive this movement according to the provided research. Therefore, social media was irrelevant as a primary driver.
📈 August 02, 2026: 37.0pp spike
Price increased from 16.5% to 53.5%
Outcome: July 31
What happened: The primary driver for the 37.0 percentage point spike was likely President Trump's announcement on the morning of July 31, 2026, that "new Iran talks should begin this afternoon" [^]. This statement, reported by Bloomberg, appears to have coincided with the target date of the prediction market, generating optimism that an effective two-week ceasefire had been achieved by July 31st, despite ongoing hostilities and previous ceasefire collapses [^]. The provided sources do not indicate direct social media activity from key figures or viral narratives as a primary driver for this specific market movement. Therefore, social media was largely irrelevant in this instance.
📉 July 31, 2026: 17.0pp drop
Price decreased from 26.0% to 9.0%
Outcome: July 31
What happened: The primary driver for the 17.0 percentage point drop in the "July 31" outcome was the confirmation on July 31, 2026, that no effective, sustained ceasefire had materialized between the U.S. and Iran [^]. On that date, traditional news outlets reported the White House was actively weighing new military strikes, while Iranian officials characterized previous ceasefire attempts as deceptions [^][^]. This confluence of events, indicating a continuation of conflict rather than a pause, directly reduced the perceived probability of an effective ceasefire by July 31. Based on the provided research, social media was irrelevant as a primary driver for this price movement.
📉 July 29, 2026: 20.5pp drop
Price decreased from 38.5% to 18.0%
Outcome: July 31
What happened: The primary driver for the 20.5 percentage point drop in the "US x Iran Effective Ceasefire by July 31" market on July 29, 2026, was traditional news reports confirming continued hostilities and dim prospects for peace. A Bloomberg Businessweek report on July 24, 2026, stated that "a renewal of peace talks is unlikely in the near term as military attacks continued from both" the US and Iran [^]. This report, appearing to lead the price move, directly contradicted the market's premise as the July 31 deadline approached. Furthermore, Iranian officials rejected any claims of a ceasefire on July 31, calling them "a lie" amidst ongoing military activity [^]. Social media was irrelevant, as no specific activity driving the movement was identified.
📉 July 28, 2026: 17.0pp drop
Price decreased from 53.5% to 36.5%
Outcome: July 31
What happened: The primary driver of the 17.0 percentage point drop was likely a traditional news report indicating a strong unlikelihood of renewed peace talks. On July 24, 2026, Bloomberg Businessweek reported that "US and Iran signaled a renewal of peace talks is unlikely in the near term as military attacks continued from both" [^]. This assessment, preceding the price move, directly undermined the prospect of an "Effective Ceasefire (2 week pause)" by July 31, despite reports of temporary military pauses on July 26-27 [^][^][^]. Social media was irrelevant as no pertinent activity was found.
4. Market Data
Contract Snapshot
This market resolves to "Yes" if a continuous 14-day period without a qualifying U.S. military action against Iran is completed between market creation and the specified end date, 11:59 PM ET; otherwise, it resolves to "No." A qualifying military action is defined as a U.S.-initiated air or surface-to-surface missile strike directly impacting Iran's terrestrial territory, explicitly excluding actions like intercepted munitions, small-arms fire, or cyber operations. In cases of conflicting reports regarding an action's occurrence or attribution, the market may remain open for up to three additional calendar days beyond the specified end date for resolution.
Available Contracts
Market options and current pricing
| Outcome bucket | Yes (price) | No (price) | Last trade probability |
|---|---|---|---|
| August 31 | $0.82 | $0.19 | 82% |
Market Discussion
As of August 4, 2026, President Trump has suspended planned U.S. military strikes against Iran, citing ongoing diplomatic efforts to reach a deal regarding the Strait of Hormuz and Iran's nuclear program, while official Iranian spokespeople have denied direct negotiations, pursuing a separate arrangement with Oman amid persistent maritime tensions, including a cargo ship attack on August 4, 2026 [^][^][^][^][^][^][^]. Despite this divergence, prediction markets as of August 4, 2026, show high confidence (72-80%) in a potential ceasefire with an August 31 resolution date [^][^][^]. This follows a prior 2-week ceasefire announced by President Trump on April 7, 2026, which took effect on April 8, 2026, and was later extended, but ultimately broke down due to renewed hostilities [^][^][^].
5. Trader Dashboard
A deterministic, per-market integrity scorecard computed from order-book and price data. Higher is better for Trader Trust, Liquidity, Move Quality and Resolution; higher means more risk for Quote Risk and Avoid Risk.
July 31PrimaryTrader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—No significant move
- Factor
July 18Trader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
July 24Trader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—Insufficient Data
- Factor
August 14Trader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—No significant move
- Factor
August 31Trader Trust—Liquidity—Move Quality—Resolution—Quote Risk—Avoid Risk—
Move Quality—No significant move
- Factor
trader_dashboard_lean_v1.13 · computed Aug 4, 2026
6. What specific military actions by either the US or Iran would likely violate the current informal pause and prevent a formal ceasefire by August 31, 2026?
| Ceasefire condition | Continuous 14 days without U.S. qualifying military action [^][^] |
|---|---|
| Qualifying U.S. military actions | Air strikes or surface-to-surface missile strikes directly impacting Iran [^][^][^][^] |
| Non-qualifying U.S. military actions | Naval gunfire, artillery, small-arms fire, cyber operations, ground incursions, or intercepted/destroyed munitions [^][^] |
A formal ceasefire requires 14 continuous days without US military strikes. For an effective ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran, a continuous 14-day period free from U.S.-initiated "qualifying military action" against Iran is necessary [^][^]. These specific qualifying actions, which would violate the current informal pause and prevent a formal ceasefire by August 31, 2026, include air strikes (encompassing bombs, air-to-surface missiles, or air-launched drones) or surface-to-surface missile or drone strikes that directly impact Iranian territory [^][^][^][^].
Certain military actions by the U.S. are excluded from preventing a ceasefire. Actions explicitly excluded from breaking the 14-day ceasefire clock include naval gunfire, artillery, small-arms fire, cyber operations, ground incursions, or intercepted/destroyed munitions [^][^]. As of August 4, 2026, the U.S.-Iran conflict remains highly volatile, marked by recent reports of a ship strike in the Strait of Hormuz and conflicting accounts regarding ongoing ceasefire negotiations [^][^][^]. This persistent instability creates a high risk for renewed military activity that could disrupt the informal pause [^][^][^].
Iranian actions could escalate tensions, potentially leading to qualifying US strikes. While the specific definition of "qualifying military action" primarily focuses on U.S.-initiated strikes, ongoing instability and potential actions by Iran could escalate the situation [^][^][^][^]. Such an escalation might prompt the U.S. to initiate the types of air or surface-to-surface missile strikes against Iran that would, in turn, prevent a formal ceasefire [^][^][^][^].
7. What public statements from the Trump administration and Iranian government in August 2026 support or contradict claims of ongoing ceasefire negotiations?
| US Position on Iran Talks | Negotiations underway, labeled 'last chance' (as of August 4, 2026) [^][^][^] |
|---|---|
| Iran's Position on Talks | Denies direct negotiations, only limited discussions with Oman (maritime transit) [^][^] |
| Mediator Status on Diplomacy | Diplomatic efforts in 'very progressive stages' with draft proposals [^][^][^] |
Trump administration and Iran offer conflicting accounts of negotiations. As of August 4, 2026, the Trump administration maintains that negotiations with Iran are ongoing and represent a 'last chance' to finalize a deal [^][^][^]. Conversely, the Iranian government explicitly denies that any direct negotiations are currently taking place, stating its engagement is confined to discussions with Oman concerning maritime transit [^][^].
Qatari mediators report significant progress in diplomatic efforts. These mediators have indicated that diplomatic efforts are presently in 'very progressive stages,' with draft proposals actively being circulated [^][^][^]. However, these mediators also specify that, despite these advancements, no direct talks have been established between the United States and Iran [^][^][^].
8. How do the publicly stated objectives of the US and Iran for a peace deal differ, particularly regarding the Strait of Hormuz and nuclear constraints?
| Interim Agreement Signed | June 2026 [^] |
|---|---|
| Interim Negotiation Window | 60 days [^] |
| Permanent Deal Deadline Proximity | Approximately two weeks away [^][^][^] |
US and Iran hold fundamentally divergent peace deal objectives. The United States publicly seeks free, international transit through the Strait of Hormuz and considers the dismantling of Iran's nuclear program a primary war objective. In contrast, Iran asserts sovereign management and control over the waterway and has shifted its nuclear program to a lower priority in negotiations. These conflicting goals have led to a stalemate, as Iran refuses to discuss its nuclear program until the US acknowledges its control of the Strait [^][^][^][^].
Negotiations face collapse as a key deadline rapidly approaches. An interim agreement, signed in June 2026 to establish a 60-day window for discussions on the nuclear program, has largely failed, with approximately two weeks remaining until the original mid-August deadline for a permanent peace deal [^][^][^]. While the Trump administration claims negotiations are underway to reopen the Strait and address Iran's nuclear threat, Tehran denies engaging in direct talks with the US, stating it is only discussing transit routes with Oman [^][^][^].
9. What satellite imagery and maritime tracking data from July-August 2026 is available to confirm a de-escalation of US and Iranian military postures in the Persian Gulf?
| De-escalation Status | Not confirmed (July-early August 2026) [^][^][^][^] |
|---|---|
| Active Hostilities | Continue, with ship attacks (July 31, August 2, 2026) [^][^][^][^] |
| Shipping Traffic | Subdued through Strait of Hormuz (July-early August 2026) [^][^] |
Military postures remain un-deescalated, with ongoing hostilities confirmed by recent attacks. Satellite imagery and maritime tracking data from July and early August 2026 do not confirm a de-escalation of US and Iranian military postures in the Persian Gulf. As of August 4, 2026, there is no evidence of a de-escalation, and active hostilities continue, highlighted by recent ship attacks in the Strait of Hormuz on July 31 and August 2, 2026 [^][^][^][^].
Available data contradicts stabilization claims, while diplomatic reports remain conflicting. Specifically, satellite and maritime tracking data from July and early August 2026 show subdued shipping traffic through the Strait of Hormuz and report ongoing security incidents [^][^]. This contradicts any claims of a stabilized military environment. Further, US and Iranian officials provide conflicting reports on diplomatic talks; while US officials and mediators indicate progress in diplomatic efforts to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, Iranian officials have denied direct negotiations are occurring [^][^][^][^].
10. What diplomatic or economic incentives offered by regional mediators like Qatar and Saudi Arabia could secure a formal ceasefire agreement by late August 2026?
| Diplomatic Progress Status | very progressive stages [^] |
|---|---|
| Date of Diplomatic Efforts Update | August 4, 2026 [^][^][^][^][^] |
| Primary Economic Incentive for Iran | US to end naval blockade and allow Iranian oil exports [^][^][^] |
As of August 4, 2026, Qatari, Omani, and Pakistani diplomacy advances significantly. Efforts are in "very progressive stages" to secure a short-term ceasefire and reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Regional mediators, including Saudi Arabia and Qatar, successfully pressured the Trump administration to delay military strikes, facilitating this diplomatic resolution [^][^][^][^][^].
A proposed deal offers economic relief for Iran. The primary economic incentive involves the US ending its naval blockade on Iran and allowing Iranian oil exports. In return, Iran would reopen the Strait of Hormuz, cease regional attacks (including those by militias), and commit to broader denuclearization talks [^][^][^].
Gulf nations pressured Trump, yet direct talks are denied. Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the UAE diplomatically emphasized the catastrophic potential for the global economy if Iran targeted Gulf energy infrastructure. This warning contributed to their successful influence on the Trump administration to delay military action. While Trump claims talks are underway, Iranian officials have officially denied direct negotiations, focusing instead on indirect communication via mediators like Oman regarding shipping security [^][^][^][^][^].
11. What Could Change the Odds
Key Catalysts
As of August 4, 2026, no formal, active 14-day ceasefire exists between the U.S. and Iran [^][^][^]. Indirect negotiations are ongoing, facilitated by Qatar, Oman, and Pakistan, following President Trump's cancellation of planned military strikes [^][^]. President Trump has asserted that negotiations have begun, while Iranian officials deny direct talks, emphasizing ongoing indirect discussions with Oman focused on the Strait of Hormuz [^][^][^][^].
A prediction market on Polymarket, tracking a 14-day 'effective ceasefire' between the U.S. and Iran resolving by August 31, 2026, shows high trader interest, with approximately 80% probability assigned to the 'August 31' outcome as of August 4, 2026 [^][^][^]. Previous ceasefire attempts in 2026, including the June Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding, have repeatedly collapsed due to unresolved disputes over Iran's nuclear program, control of the Strait of Hormuz, and military hostilities [^][^]. The two-week ceasefire, originally ordered by President Trump on April 7, 2026, was extended, leading to the signing of an MOU on June 17, 2026 [^][^]. This MOU required Iran to make efforts for the safe passage of commercial vessels from the Persian Gulf to the Sea of Oman [^]. However, tensions persisted, with Iran reportedly attacking a commercial vessel on June 25, 2026, and further U.S. military actions in late June 2026 [^][^][^].
Key Dates & Catalysts
- Closes: August 31, 2026
12. Decision-Flipping Events
- Trigger: As of August 4, 2026, no formal, active 14-day ceasefire exists between the U.S.
- Trigger: And Iran [^] [^] [^] .
- Trigger: Indirect negotiations are ongoing, facilitated by Qatar, Oman, and Pakistan, following President Trump's cancellation of planned military strikes [^] [^] .
- Trigger: President Trump has asserted that negotiations have begun, while Iranian officials deny direct talks, emphasizing ongoing indirect discussions with Oman focused on the Strait of Hormuz [^] [^] [^] [^] .
14. Historical Resolutions
No historical resolution data available for this series.
