US-Iran 14-Day Ceasefire Clock: Polymarket Odds Across September Deadlines

This market will resolve to “Yes” if there is a continuous 14-day period during which the United States does not take a qualifying military action against Iran that…

Closed marketArchived market

US x Iran Effective Ceasefire begins by...? (2 week pause)

US x Iran Effective Ceasefire by September 4?

Primary signalYes
Probability100.0%
ResolutionSep 4, 2026
ResolutionSep 4, 2026
Signal board

Price, depth and useful dates

An editorial view of the signal: what leads, how much activity is behind it, and which date carries the risk.

Source on Polymarket
Archived marketYesYes
Total volume$4.1MAll-time traded activity
24 hour volume$249.2KRecent market attention
Liquidity$496.8KDepth available around prices
Open interest$487.0KCapital still exposed
ResolutionSep 4, 2026Next active phase close
Price convictionStrongLeader is priced with very high conviction.
Active scenarios

Archived market

Open phases only
YesUS x Iran Effective Ceasefire by September 4?
100.0%
NoUS x Iran Effective Ceasefire by September 4?
0.1%
Editorial analysisCurrent situation and market structure

What is happening now

The Polymarket event “US x Iran Effective Ceasefire begins by…” (event ID 4168072) is a date-ladder prediction market tracking whether the United States takes a qualifying military action against Iran before several sequential deadlines in September 2026. Four parallel markets exist, each asking if a continuous 14-day period without a US strike against Iran concludes by a specific date. The primary market (September 7) currently leads with a 52.5% probability that “No” (ceasefire has not yet begun by September 7), while three subsequent markets (September 11, 18, and 30) show progressively stronger conviction that the ceasefire *will* occur, with the September 30 market assigning 75.5% probability to “Yes.” Total trading volume since launch stands at $220.6 million, indicating sustained trader attention despite the lack of concrete military action to date.

How the market is structured

The market follows a date-ladder structure with four discrete milestones: September 7, September 11, September 18, and September 30. Each market asks whether a continuous 14-day window free of a qualifying US military action against Iran exists by its respective deadline. A “qualifying military action” is defined narrowly as an air strike or surface-to-surface missile strike that directly impacts Iranian territory—excluding interceptions, cyber operations, ground incursions, and minor strikes. If any such action occurs, the corresponding market resolves to “No” (ceasefire did not begin); if no qualifying action occurs throughout the period, the market resolves to “Yes” (ceasefire began). The primary market (September 7) serves as the anchor, with later markets providing incremental confidence that the ceasefire will eventually materialize as the window for a no-action period lengthens.

Path to the leading outcome

The leading outcome is “Yes”—that the US-Iran effective ceasefire will begin by some date in September 2026. Currently, the September 30 market carries the highest weight at 75.5%, reflecting the longest remaining horizon and the strongest collective belief among traders that no US strike will occur through late September. The path to this outcome is straightforward: as long as the United States avoids a qualifying military action against Iran over the course of the month, the market will gradually accumulate probability toward “Yes” across all dates. Conversely, the emergence of a qualifying strike—even a limited one—would immediately flip the primary market to “Yes,” triggering a cascade of resolution across all subsequent markets. The market therefore functions as a probabilistic countdown, with each passing date representing increased confidence that the ceasefire will be achieved by the final deadline.

What could change the pricing

Two categories of events could significantly alter the market’s trajectory. First, any confirmed US military strike on Iranian territory would cause the primary market to resolve instantaneously to “Yes,” collapsing the probability distribution and invalidating all downstream markets. Second, official announcements from the US or Iranian governments, as well as credible intelligence updates, would serve as tiebreakers when multiple sources report conflicting timelines. The market’s resolution mechanics depend entirely on the occurrence, attribution, and timing of qualifying strikes, making the market highly sensitive to real-world escalation dynamics. Until such an event occurs—or until the September 30 deadline passes without incident—the market will continue to trend toward “Yes” as the window for avoidance widens.

Editorial read

The Polymarket event provides a clear, quantifiable snapshot of market sentiment ahead of the broader geopolitical calculus surrounding US-Iran relations. The data suggests that traders are increasingly confident the ceasefire will be achieved by late September, with probability climbing from 52.5% (by September 7) to 75.5% (by September 30). This gradual tightening reflects a cautious but optimistic stance: the market assumes no immediate escalation and prices in the likelihood that diplomatic channels will prevail. However, the market remains binary and binary-resolving—if a strike occurs, the entire narrative flips. In practice, these markets function as early-warning instruments; they do not predict war but rather encode the probability that the US will choose restraint through the critical final weeks of September. The structural design—a date-ladder of escalating confidence—makes the outcome interpretable: the sooner the ceasefire begins, the lower the probability assigned to “No” across all markets. For anyone monitoring the situation, the key signal to watch is whether any US military action against Iran surfaces; everything else is secondary noise.

Editorial market brief.
This analysis is provided for informational and editorial purposes only. Market signal prices reflect market-implied expectations, not verified outcomes or recommendations. Markets can be illiquid, volatile, and subject to ambiguous resolution criteria.