Daily Market Mispricings: 4 Events Where We Disagree With Polymarket — May 5, 2026

TL;DROn May 5, 2026, Naly’s clearest disagreements are Trump-in-China-on-May-13, where Polymarket prices YES at 53c but our fair value is just 5c, and WTI $120 in May, where the market pays only 45c YES against our 68c fair value. The sharpest reason is rule-level causality: official calendars and one-minute spike mechanics matter more than headline sentiment.

Key Takeaways

Trump’s May 13 China contract looks overpriced because the market is paying for a narrow Eastern Time arrival technicality, not the announced May 14-15 Beijing schedule.

The U.S.-Iran meeting contract looks underpriced because the rules count indirect in-person diplomacy, and Pakistan/Oman mediation channels are still active.

Both WTI contracts are really spike-probability bets, not slow-drift forecasts, because any one-minute high can settle YES.

Across all four events, the edge comes from reading the resolution mechanics and causal path more carefully than the headline tape.

4 Mispricings at a Glance

Event Snapshot

Will Donald Trump visit China on May 13, 2026?

YES Resolves May 31, 2026 Open 92% confidence

Polymarket Top Answer YES 53%

Naly Top Answer NO 95%

Max Payout if Correct +47c

0c 50c $1.00

Polymarket Naly

Why we disagree: The market is paying for a narrow ET arrival technicality even though the public trip schedule still points to May 14-15 in Beijing.

Event Snapshot

US x Iran diplomatic meeting by May 31, 2026?

YES Resolves Listed date May 31, 2026; metadata close May 15, 2026 Open 78% confidence

Polymarket Top Answer NO 69%

Naly Top Answer YES 55%

Max Payout if Correct +69c

0c 50c $1.00

Polymarket Naly

Why we disagree: The contract counts indirect in-person diplomacy, and active mediator channels make that qualifying path more alive than 31c YES implies.

Event Snapshot

Will WTI Crude Oil (WTI) hit (HIGH) $120 in May?

YES Resolves June 1, 2026 Open 74% confidence

Polymarket Top Answer NO 55%

Naly Top Answer YES 68%

Max Payout if Correct +55c

0c 50c $1.00

Polymarket Naly

Why we disagree: This contract settles on any one-minute high, so conflict-driven overshoots matter more than where WTI closes the day.

Event Snapshot

Will WTI Crude Oil (WTI) hit (HIGH) $130 in May?

YES Resolves June 1, 2026 Open 65% confidence

Polymarket Top Answer NO 72%

Naly Top Answer YES 52%

Max Payout if Correct +72c

0c 50c $1.00

Polymarket Naly

Why we disagree: A $130 print is still a tail, but one-minute-high mechanics plus Hormuz tail risk make it closer to a coin flip than 28c YES suggests.

How to read this: Polymarket Top Answer and Naly Top Answer show the final answer each side sees as most likely. Max Payout if Correct shows the gross upside from the current quote to the $1 settlement if the selected contract side wins. The horizontal graph still shows where that selected side sits on a 0c to $1 range for Polymarket versus Naly.

Event 1

Will Donald Trump visit China on May 13, 2026?

GeopoliticsContract · YESResolves May 31, 2026Open92% confidence

+47c

Max Payout if Correct

Polymarket Top Answer YES 53%

Naly Top Answer NO 95%
Trade on Polymarket →

The market is paying for a narrow ET arrival technicality even though the public trip schedule still points to May 14-15 in Beijing.

Causal Chain

Cause Cause: The White House and Reuters still frame the Beijing visit as a May 14-15 trip, not a May 13 arrival.

↓

Effect Effect: Because the contract resolves on Eastern Time and requires physical entry into China, YES only cashes if Trump lands before 11:59 p.m. ET on May 13, effectively before noon on May 14 in Beijing.

↓

Projection Projection: Without a public itinerary showing that narrow arrival window, the market is overpaying for a timezone technicality rather than a clearly scheduled May 13 visit.

Key Factors

| Factor
▲ | Reuters reported on March 25 that the White House scheduled the Trump-Xi meeting in Beijing for May 14-15.
▲ | Reuters reported again on April 14, in a story about Eric Trump joining the trip, that the state visit remained a May 14-15 event.
▲ | The contract explicitly requires Trump to physically enter China; airspace, departure timing, and vague travel chatter do not count.
▲ | A May 14 local-date arrival can still resolve YES only if it happens early enough in Beijing to remain May 13 in ET, which is a much narrower path than the headline schedule suggests.

Bayesian Calculation

Base rate: 53% YES from the market’s current quote.

Positive update: The trip itself appears live, so a morning Beijing arrival that still prints May 13 in ET cannot be ruled out entirely.

Negative update: Every public schedule signal still anchors the visit to May 14-15 in Beijing, and no credible reporting has supplied an early-arrival itinerary.

Naly estimate: 5% YES, implying a 5c fair price on the YES contract.

Alternative explanation: The market’s best case is that presidential long-haul travel often means a May 13 U.S. departure and a Beijing-morning landing on May 14, which could still count as May 13 in ET. If traders think the White House has already fixed an early-arrival window, 53c YES is less irrational than it looks.

What Would Make Us Wrong

A credible itinerary showing Trump lands in China before noon Beijing time on May 14, or an official clarification that the arrival itself is expected to register on May 13 in ET, would move this contract sharply toward YES and invalidate our bearish call.

Fresh Checks

Trump to visit China on May 14-15, White House says

Exclusive: Trump’s son Eric to join father’s state visit to China

Delayed Trump-Xi summit to take place in Beijing on May 14 and 15: White House

Event 2

US x Iran diplomatic meeting by May 31, 2026?

GeopoliticsContract · YESResolves Listed date May 31, 2026; metadata close May 15, 2026Open78% confidence

+69c

Max Payout if Correct

Polymarket Top Answer NO 69%

Naly Top Answer YES 55%
Trade on Polymarket →

The contract counts indirect in-person diplomacy, and active mediator channels make that qualifying path more alive than 31c YES implies.

Causal Chain

Cause Cause: Pakistan and Oman are still functioning as live mediation channels, and both sides continue passing formal proposals through intermediaries.

↓

Effect Effect: Because the contract counts indirect in-person diplomacy, a mediator-hosted session can resolve YES even if Tehran still rejects direct face-to-face U.S.-Iran talks.

↓

Projection Projection: Another Islamabad- or Muscat-style in-person round remains more likely than the 31c YES price implies.

Key Factors

| Factor
▲ | Reuters reported on May 2 that Iran conveyed a formal proposal through mediators and said it was ready for diplomacy if the U.S. changed its approach.
▲ | Reuters reported on April 25 that U.S. negotiators were scheduled to go to Islamabad even as Iran said it did not plan direct talks.
▲ | Reuters reported on April 20 that a senior Pakistani government source was confident Iran would attend U.S. talks.
▲ | Reuters reported on April 13 that dialogue remained alive after a tense Islamabad round ended without a breakthrough.
▲ | The contract language explicitly says indirect in-person meetings through mediators qualify, which widens the path to YES materially.

Bayesian Calculation

Base rate: 31% YES from the market’s current quote.

Positive update: Active mediation, formal proposals, and prior Islamabad diplomacy all say the process is stalled but still operating.

Negative update: Trump publicly rejected Iran’s latest offer, and fresh Gulf violence can still derail logistics or political appetite.

Naly estimate: 55% YES, implying a 55c fair price on the YES contract.

Alternative explanation: The market may be correctly reading the political mood: both governments could prefer signaling toughness over convening another meeting, and every failed or postponed Islamabad headline makes traders less willing to pay for diplomatic optionality.

What Would Make Us Wrong

If Washington or Tehran explicitly rules out another in-person session in the current window, or if Pakistan and Oman stop publicly floating mediator roles, then the indirect-meeting path collapses and the market’s NO lean becomes the right call.

Fresh Checks

Iran offers Strait deal; Trump dissatisfied but prefers non-military path

US negotiators to go to Islamabad, but Iran says no direct talks

Pakistan confident Iran will attend US talks, senior Pakistani government source says

US, Iran leave door open to dialogue after tense Islamabad talks

Event 3

Will WTI Crude Oil (WTI) hit (HIGH) $120 in May?

MarketsContract · YESResolves June 1, 2026Open74% confidence

+55c

Max Payout if Correct

Polymarket Top Answer NO 55%

Naly Top Answer YES 68%
Trade on Polymarket →

This contract settles on any one-minute high, so conflict-driven overshoots matter more than where WTI closes the day.

Causal Chain

Cause Cause: Hormuz shipping disruption, attacks on regional infrastructure, and military escort operations keep the oil shock highly nonlinear.

↓

Effect Effect: With WTI already around $105, the market only needs a mid-teens overshoot, and this contract settles on any one-minute high rather than a sustained close.

↓

Projection Projection: Another shipping or military shock can produce a transient panic print to $120 even if prices later retrace.

Key Factors

| Factor
▼ | Reuters reported on May 5 that WTI was around $104.88 after another volatile session tied to Hormuz supply-risk headlines.
▲ | Reuters reported on April 2 that J.P. Morgan saw $120-$130 oil in the near term and above $150 if disruption persisted into mid-May.
▲ | Axios reported on May 4 that a fully closed Strait of Hormuz had long been treated as an almost unmanageable scenario by energy experts.
▲ | Reuters reported on May 4 that U.S.-flagged ships crossed the strait under military escort, which eases some immediate fear but does not restore normal shipping confidence.
▲ | The contract resolves off any one-minute high in the active month, so even brief panic liquidity gaps can settle YES.

Bayesian Calculation

Base rate: 45% YES from the market’s current quote.

Positive update: The starting price is already elevated, and the contract only needs a one-minute spike rather than a durable regime change.

Negative update: Project Freedom escorts and partial transits reduce the odds of the most acute supply panic.

Naly estimate: 68% YES, implying a 68c fair price on the YES contract.

Alternative explanation: The market may be saying that traders have already internalized the war premium, so even ugly Gulf headlines now fade faster as Washington proves it can escort at least some shipping through the strait.

What Would Make Us Wrong

If escorted transits expand smoothly, insurance markets normalize, and WTI stops reacting to each new Hormuz headline with outsized intraday jumps, then $120 may remain just out of reach and the market’s NO lean will hold.

Fresh Checks

US crude eases more than 1%, traders weigh supply risks

A closed Strait of Hormuz was once unthinkable

J.P. Morgan warns oil could top $150 if disruptions persist into mid-May

US says it has missile destroyers in Gulf and two American ships have crossed Strait

Event 4

Will WTI Crude Oil (WTI) hit (HIGH) $130 in May?

MarketsContract · YESResolves June 1, 2026Open65% confidence

+72c

Max Payout if Correct

Polymarket Top Answer NO 72%

Naly Top Answer YES 52%
Trade on Polymarket →

A $130 print is still a tail, but one-minute-high mechanics plus Hormuz tail risk make it closer to a coin flip than 28c YES suggests.

Causal Chain

Cause Cause: The same Hormuz shock that supports $120 also creates nonlinear tail-risk if shipping disruption worsens again.

↓

Effect Effect: Once WTI trades deeper into panic territory, stop-losses, short covering, and thin liquidity can accelerate a one-minute overshoot toward $130.

↓

Projection Projection: A brief escalation can be enough for settlement even if the market later falls back below the level.

Key Factors

| Factor
▲ | Reuters reported on April 2 that J.P. Morgan viewed $120-$130 as plausible in the near term and above $150 under a longer disruption.
▲ | Reuters reported on May 5 that WTI remained near $105 despite signs of partial escort normalization, which shows how much geopolitical premium is already embedded.
▲ | Axios reported on May 4 that experts once treated a closed Hormuz as almost unmanageable, underscoring how extreme the upside path remains.
▲ | Reuters reported on May 4 that the U.S. had begun protected transits, which is the main reason this call carries lower confidence than the $120 contract.
▲ | Because the contract settles on any one-minute high, it requires a momentary panic print, not a stable $130 regime.

Bayesian Calculation

Base rate: 28% YES from the market’s current quote.

Positive update: Tail-risk remains live, and transient panic spikes can travel much farther than linear price-target models imply.

Negative update: A move from roughly $105 to $130 still requires a much larger second leg than the $120 contract does.

Naly estimate: 52% YES, implying a 52c fair price on the YES contract.

Alternative explanation: The market may simply be right that $130 needs too much additional damage from an already shocked system. If traders think escorts, diplomacy, and adaptive rerouting cap the next panic leg, then sub-30c YES is reasonable.

What Would Make Us Wrong

If shipping conditions keep improving and WTI repeatedly fails to turn new Gulf headlines into fresh highs above the low-$110s, then the path to a $130 one-minute print will shrink quickly and the market’s NO consensus will be vindicated.

Fresh Checks

US crude eases more than 1%, traders weigh supply risks

A closed Strait of Hormuz was once unthinkable

J.P. Morgan warns oil could top $150 if disruptions persist into mid-May

US says it has missile destroyers in Gulf and two American ships have crossed Strait

Conclusion

The next catalysts are unusually concrete: a White House itinerary that pins down Trump’s China arrival window, any public Islamabad or Muscat meeting notice involving U.S. and Iranian representatives, and whether WTI keeps responding to Hormuz headlines with multi-dollar intraday gaps. Those three watchpoints will decide whether May 5, 2026’s biggest mispricings compress or widen.

Methodology

We start with the selected Polymarket quote on one contract side, translate Naly’s probability on that same side into a fair cents price, and then ask whether the causal path to settlement is wider or narrower than the market implies. Our public calibration and resolution history live on /track-record and /predictions/scorecard, with the broader framework explained at /methodology.

Market price is the current entry cost and the market-implied probability for the quoted binary side.

Naly fair price is our probability estimate for that same side translated into cents on the same $1 payoff contract.

Fair-value edge is Naly fair price minus market price, while max payout if correct is the gross distance from the current quote to $1 settlement.

Disclaimer

This article is probabilistic analysis based on public reporting, contract rules, and live market context as of May 5, 2026. It is not financial advice, not a guarantee of outcome, and not a recommendation to trade any specific contract.