Daily Market Mispricings: 2 Finance Events Where We Disagree With Polymarket — May 29, 2026

TL;DROn May 29, 2026, Naly’s sharpest finance disagreement is WTI’s May $85 “LOW” contract: Polymarket prices YES at 37c, but we think the literal rule makes fair value closer to 92c. We also fade SpaceX’s $2.0T sprint, pricing YES at 45c versus the market’s 82c, because a headline valuation range is not the same as an executed mark.

Markets are supposed to compress information. They are worse at compressing contract-language quirks and execution-path risk. Today’s finance slate has one likely title-versus-resolution mismatch in oil and one probable over-read of IPO marketing language in private-market valuation. In both cases, our disagreement is causal: we think traders are reacting to the headline faster than they are tracing the actual resolution path.

Key Takeaways

WTI’s May $85 contract still looks mispriced because the literal settlement language appears easier to satisfy than the title suggests.

SpaceX at $2.0T looks overbid because a target range touching $2 trillion is not proof of a printed valuation at or above $2 trillion by June 30.

Both disagreements are answer flips, not minor confidence trims: we lean YES on WTI and NO on SpaceX.

The watchpoint is not just direction but mechanics: exact data source, exact trigger, and exact timing into resolution.

2 Mispricings at a Glance

Event Snapshot

Will WTI Crude Oil (WTI) hit (LOW) $85 in May?

YES Resolves June 1, 2026 Open 72/100 confidence

Polymarket Top Answer NO 63%

Naly Top Answer YES 92%

Max Payout if Correct +63c

0c 50c $1.00

Polymarket Naly

Why we disagree: Traders appear anchored to the title’s intuitive downside meaning, while the literal rule reads like an upside-friendly trigger.

Event Snapshot

Will SpaceX's valuation hit (HIGH) $2.0T by June 30?

YES Resolves June 30, 2026 Open 65/100 confidence

Polymarket Top Answer YES 82%

Naly Top Answer NO 55%

Max Payout if Correct +82c

0c 50c $1.00

Polymarket Naly

Why we disagree: The market is treating a reported valuation range as if the top end is already effectively printed.

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 WTI Crude Oil (WTI) hit (LOW) $85 in May?

MarketsContract · YESResolves June 1, 2026Open72/100 confidence

+63c

Max Payout if Correct

Polymarket Top Answer NO 63%

Naly Top Answer YES 92%
Trade on Polymarket →

The quoted market price here is 37c on YES, which means a trader can enter the YES side for $0.37 and the market is implying roughly a 37% chance of a $1 payout if the contract resolves YES. Our 92c fair price is the cents value implied by Naly’s separate 92% probability estimate on that same YES side. That makes this an answer flip, not a nuance call: the market’s top answer is NO, ours is YES. Max payout if correct on a 37c YES entry is 63c, while the fair-value edge is the gap between our 92c estimate and the market’s 37c price.

Causal Chain

Cause Traders likely read “hit LOW $85” as a downside-touch contract and price it as though oil must fall to or through $85.

↓

Effect The listed resolution wording instead appears to reward a one-minute candle low at or above $85, which is a radically easier condition when crude is already trading in the high-$80s.

↓

Projection If traders keep anchoring on the title while the resolution source stays literal, the contract should converge upward into expiry unless a data-source wrinkle invalidates that reading.

Key Factors

| Factor
▼ | Late-May WTI panels show active futures trading well above $85, including a May 29 low of $87.65 on one historical series at Investing.com.
▼ | Oil futures were still elevated enough in late May that even bearish daily moves did not obviously negate an above-$85 floor on all relevant active-month prints, per AP’s May 27 crude futures wrap.
▼ | The residual risk is mechanical, not directional: if the contract maps to a different active-month or rollover convention, some related WTI series printed below $85 on May 29, including $83.62 on another historical page at Investing.com.
▲ | That split is exactly why we do not go to 99%: the edge comes from likely trader misread plus likely qualifying price action, but basis ambiguity still matters.
▲ | Broader energy-market context remained tight enough in May that WTI price levels were still elevated in official weekly energy summaries such as the EIA highlights PDF.

Bayesian Calculation

Base rate: Start from the market’s 37% YES price.

Positive update: The apparent literal settlement condition looks much easier than the title implies, and publicly visible WTI series spent meaningful late-May time above $85.

Negative update: Active-month mapping, Pyth source specifics, and title-versus-rule ambiguity create real but bounded settlement risk.

Naly estimate: 92% YES, or 92c fair value on the same binary contract.

Alternative explanation: The cleanest case against us is that the market is not confused at all; it may simply be pricing a known resolution-source nuance that outside traders cannot verify from public futures pages. If Polymarket’s oracle references a distinct active-month series or a narrower time window, the intuitive “already above $85” argument weakens fast.

What Would Make Us Wrong

We are wrong if the operative source either never printed a qualifying one-minute low at or above $85 during the contract window or if the platform interprets the title and the rule in a way that effectively turns this into a downside-touch contract. This is less a macro miss than a contract-mechanics miss.

Fresh Checks

WTI historical data with May 29 low at $87.65

Alternate WTI historical series with May 29 low at $83.62

AP: Crude oil futures close on May 27, 2026

EIA weekly petroleum highlights

Event 2

Will SpaceX's valuation hit (HIGH) $2.0T by June 30?

ForecastContract · YESResolves June 30, 2026Open65/100 confidence

+82c

Max Payout if Correct

Polymarket Top Answer YES 82%

Naly Top Answer NO 55%
Trade on Polymarket →

The quoted market price here is 82c on YES, meaning the market is implying about an 82% chance that this contract pays out $1. Our 45c fair price is the price implied by Naly’s separate 45% probability estimate on that same YES side, which flips the top answer to NO at 55%. If a trader instead takes the NO side at the market’s implied 18c, max payout if correct is 82c; the fair-value edge is the 37-point gap between our 55% NO view and the market’s 18% implied NO probability.

Causal Chain

Cause Traders see repeated headlines about a SpaceX IPO targeting roughly $1.75T to $2.0T and compress that into “$2T is basically happening.”

↓

Effect But the contract needs an actual qualifying valuation mark at or above $2.0T by June 30, not just a roadshow narrative or aspirational upper bound.

↓

Projection When the market confuses a possible top-end price with a realized mark, odds overshoot; the contract can still miss even if the IPO story remains very strong.

Key Factors

| Factor
▲ | Reuters reporting, mirrored at Investing.com, describes the valuation logic as unconventional and centers more on justifying $1.75T than proving a clean $2.0T print.
▲ | Axios framed the debate around enormous total-addressable-market claims, which supports enthusiasm but also signals how much of the case is narrative rather than already-settled market clearing.
▲ | MoneyWeek noted Scottish Mortgage still marked its SpaceX holding at about $1.25T as of March 31, 2026, underscoring how far private marks still sit below the threshold.
▲ | Even supportive coverage at Kiplinger treats $1.75T to $2T as a range, not a completed valuation event.
▼ | The causal miss is timing: giant IPOs often headline the highest conceivable number before the actual clearing valuation is known.

Bayesian Calculation

Base rate: Start from the market’s 82% YES price.

Positive update: Credible reporting says SpaceX is targeting a historic IPO range that can reach $2.0T at the upper end.

Negative update: A target range is not an executed mark, private comparables remain lower, and path-to-print risk before June 30 is much larger than the market implies.

Naly estimate: 45% YES, which means NO remains our top answer at 55%.

Alternative explanation: The best bull case is that scarcity plus index-inclusion demand plus Musk-driven retail intensity can force price discovery straight to the top end or above it faster than traditional valuation frameworks expect. In that world, the market is not overpricing probability; it is correctly front-running a frenzy.

What Would Make Us Wrong

We are wrong if a credible private-market mark, NPM print, or IPO pricing event reaches or exceeds $2.0T before June 30. We would also be wrong if the market is correctly discounting structural demand that collapses the usual gap between a marketed range and a final valuation.

Fresh Checks

Reuters via Investing: the unconventional logic behind SpaceX’s $1.75T price tag

Axios: SpaceX’s galaxy math

MoneyWeek: Scottish Mortgage confirms its SpaceX valuation

Kiplinger: What investors need to know about the SpaceX IPO

Conclusion

The next catalysts are straightforward. For WTI, the only thing that matters is the exact settlement interpretation and source series into expiry. For SpaceX, the watchpoints are any fresh private-market marks, formal IPO pricing updates, and whether reported demand turns a headline range into an actual $2.0T print before June 30. Until those catalysts arrive, we see one contract underpricing literal mechanics and another overpricing narrative momentum.

Methodology

Naly’s finance mispricing roundups start with the quoted market price, convert that to implied probability on the exact contract side, then rebuild a fair price from causal drivers: trigger mechanics, timing path, resolution source, and whether the market is overreacting to a headline rather than the payout condition. Our public scoring philosophy and historical results are tracked at /track-record.

Disclaimer

This article is for informational purposes only and reflects Naly’s probabilistic view as of May 29, 2026. It is not investment advice, a solicitation, or a guarantee of outcome. Prediction markets can move on new information, liquidity shifts, and rule interpretations, including settlement mechanics that differ from headline wording.