Daily Market Mispricings: 2 Events Where We Disagree With Polymarket — April 30, 2026

TL;DROn April 30, 2026, Naly disagrees with Polymarket on two geopolitical clocks: Trump's China trip looks too cheap at 26c YES versus our 60c fair value, while the next U.S.-Iran diplomatic meeting looks too delayed at 82c YES after May 10 versus our 40c fair value. The sharpest reason is that official scheduling and mediated diplomacy matter more than headline mood swings.

On April 30, 2026, the cleanest answer flips in this selected set come from contract mechanics plus fresh diplomacy, not from vague macro sentiment. One market appears to overprice delay in the next U.S.-Iran contact even though mediated in-person talks can qualify quickly. The other appears to underprice Trump's May 14 China visit even though both Washington and Beijing are still publicly treating that date as live.

Key Takeaways

The strongest bullish flip is Trump's China trip: Polymarket prices YES at 26c, while our fair value is 60c because the White House named May 14-15 and Beijing is still coordinating.

The strongest bearish flip is the U.S.-Iran meeting timing market: Polymarket prices YES at 82c for a post-May-10 meeting, while we mark that YES leg at 40c because mediated in-person diplomacy can restart faster than the tape implies.

In both cases, the edge comes from reading the resolution mechanics closely: ET arrival timing matters for China, and mediated in-person talks matter for Iran.

2 Mispricings at a Glance

Event Snapshot

Will the next US x Iran diplomatic meeting occur after May 10?

YES Resolves May 10, 2026 Open High confidence

Polymarket Top Answer YES 82%

Naly Top Answer NO 60%

Max Payout if Correct +18c

0c 50c $1.00

Polymarket Naly

Why we disagree: The market is treating a delayed restart as almost certain, but mediated in-person diplomacy can restart faster than the headline tone implies.

Event Snapshot

Will Donald Trump visit China on May 14, 2026?

YES Resolves May 31, 2026 Open Very High confidence

Polymarket Top Answer NO 74%

Naly Top Answer YES 60%

Max Payout if Correct +74c

0c 50c $1.00

Polymarket Naly

Why we disagree: The market is over-discounting ET timing noise despite a named White House date and continued Beijing-Washington coordination.

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 the next US x Iran diplomatic meeting occur after May 10?

GeopoliticsContract · YESResolves May 10, 2026OpenHigh confidence

+18c

Max Payout if Correct

Polymarket Top Answer YES 82%

Naly Top Answer NO 60%
Trade on Polymarket →

The market is treating a delayed restart as almost certain, but mediated in-person diplomacy can restart faster than the headline tone implies.

Causal Chain

Cause Cause: Pakistan and Oman are still actively mediating, and this contract counts mediated in-person diplomacy rather than only a headline-grabbing direct summit.

↓

Effect Effect: That broad qualifying standard raises the odds of a fast, public, in-person shuttle session before May 11 even if the substantive deal remains stuck.

↓

Projection Projection: We expect the next qualifying contact to come sooner than the market's delay-heavy pricing assumes, so the post-May-10 YES leg looks too rich.

Key Factors

| Factor
▲ | AP reported on April 26, 2026 that Pakistani officials still described indirect U.S.-Iran ceasefire talks as alive despite Trump's cancellation of the envoys' Islamabad trip.
▲ | Axios reported on April 15, 2026 that U.S. officials expected a new round of direct in-person talks in the coming days, showing that rapid follow-up was already part of the base case before the latest stall.
▲ | AP and Axios both reported on April 27, 2026 that Iran was still pushing proposals through Pakistan and Oman, which matters because mediated in-person exchanges can satisfy this market's qualifying standard.
▲ | CENTCOM's April 12, 2026 blockade announcement increased the economic cost of delay for Iran, which raises pressure for some form of near-term diplomatic contact even without a grand bargain.
▲ | The main opposing fact is that Rubio and the White House rejected any track that sidelines the nuclear file, so a true settlement remains difficult even if a qualifying meeting occurs.

Bayesian Calculation

Base rate: 82% YES from the market baseline, which assumes the next qualifying meeting is more likely to come after May 10 than before it.

Positive update: The canceled envoy trip and the U.S. demand to keep the nuclear issue central both support delay risk.

Negative update: Mediated in-person diplomacy still counts, Pakistan and Oman remain active, and the blockade plus oil shock create pressure for a faster acknowledged meeting.

Naly estimate: 40% YES, which implies 60% NO.

Alternative explanation: The market may be right if the White House insists on a full nuclear track before any publicly acknowledged in-person mediation session can happen, because that would make even a small qualifying meeting hard to schedule before May 11.

What Would Make Us Wrong

We would likely be wrong if Pakistan's channel collapses, Oman stops hosting or relaying in-person diplomacy, or Washington explicitly rules out any further qualifying contact before May 11.

Fresh Checks

AP: Pakistan says U.S.-Iran mediation moving ahead after Trump holds back envoys

AP: Iran offers to reopen Strait of Hormuz if U.S. lifts blockade

Axios: Iran offers U.S. deal to reopen strait but postpone nuclear talks

CENTCOM: U.S. to Blockade Ships Entering or Exiting Iranian Ports

Event 2

Will Donald Trump visit China on May 14, 2026?

GeopoliticsContract · YESResolves May 31, 2026OpenVery High confidence

+74c

Max Payout if Correct

Polymarket Top Answer NO 74%

Naly Top Answer YES 60%
Trade on Polymarket →

The market is over-discounting ET timing noise despite a named White House date and continued Beijing-Washington coordination.

Causal Chain

Cause Cause: The White House has already named May 14-15 for the Beijing trip, and Beijing has continued to say both sides are maintaining communication about the visit.

↓

Effect Effect: Once both governments publicly anchor specific dates, cancellation risk falls and the contract becomes more about travel logistics than about whether the summit exists.

↓

Projection Projection: Unless a fresh security shock or a schedule rewrite appears, the YES leg should trade materially above 26c even after discounting ET arrival-time ambiguity.

Key Factors

| Factor
▲ | Reuters and AP reported on March 25, 2026 that the White House scheduled Trump's Beijing trip for May 14-15, which is stronger evidence than vague travel chatter.
▲ | In a Chinese Foreign Ministry briefing on April 15, 2026, spokesperson Guo Jiakun said the two sides maintain communication on the matter, which is a live reaffirmation rather than a stale March headline.
▲ | China Daily reported on April 16, 2026 that Beijing and Washington were still liaising on the visit, reinforcing that the summit remained an active diplomatic project.
▲ | Because Xi is also slated for a reciprocal Washington visit later in 2026, both sides have reputational reasons to avoid an unnecessary second postponement.
▲ | The real opposing factor is contract mechanics: a very early May 14 arrival in Beijing could still translate to May 13 in ET and resolve this contract NO despite a locally dated May 14 landing.
▼ | Trump's history of late itinerary changes means we cannot price YES near certainty even with a named date.

Bayesian Calculation

Base rate: 26% YES from the market baseline, which heavily discounts the official schedule.

Positive update: A named White House date plus continued Chinese coordination materially raises the probability that the contract resolves YES.

Negative update: ET timestamp ambiguity and Trump's habit of delaying foreign travel keep us below an aggressive near-certain estimate.

Naly estimate: 60% YES, which implies 40% NO.

Alternative explanation: The market may simply be pricing the calendar rule correctly: if Air Force One touches down in China during the local daytime on May 14, that can still be May 13 in ET, making the contract a flight-plan puzzle rather than a summit-probability call.

What Would Make Us Wrong

We would likely be wrong if the White House releases an itinerary implying an early May 14 local arrival, if the trip slips again because of Iran or security concerns, or if Beijing stops publicly treating the visit as an active plan.

Fresh Checks

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

AP: Trump will travel to Beijing for rescheduled China trip May 14-15

Chinese Foreign Ministry briefing on April 15, 2026

China Daily: China liaising with U.S. on Trump visit

Conclusion

The next watchpoints are concrete, not abstract. For Iran, watch whether Pakistan or Oman can produce a publicly acknowledged in-person mediated session before May 11 and whether the blockade stance softens. For China, watch White House travel logistics, departure timing, and the exact ET timestamp of any Beijing arrival, because that timing detail could decide the contract even if the summit itself goes ahead.

FAQ

Why does the Iran market look like a disagreement about delay rather than diplomacy itself?

Because the key pricing error is about timing and contract mechanics: the market is pricing a post-May-10 meeting as overwhelmingly likely, while we think mediated in-person diplomacy can qualify sooner.

Why is the Trump-China market not just a yes-on-the-trip call?

Because the contract resolves on the ET calendar date of physical entry into China, so travel timing matters almost as much as the political decision to make the trip.

Why compare max payout with fair-value edge separately?

Because max payout is the mechanical profit on a winning $1 binary share, while fair-value edge compares the market price with our own probability-based fair price on that same side.

Methodology

We start from market-implied priors, update them with fresh reporting, resolution mechanics, and explicit causal chains, and track calibration on /track-record. For deeper context on how Naly scores answer flips, readers can also review /predictions/scorecard and /methodology.

Disclaimer

This article is probabilistic research for informational purposes only, not financial advice or a recommendation to trade.