A US-Iran ceasefire may not materialise until the end of the year, according to data from an active prediction market tracking the conflict.
Polymarket, which gauges the likelihood of a publicly announced and mutually agreed halt in hostilities between Washington and Tehran, shows a gradual increase in probability but places the most confident estimates in December 2026.
While both governments have issued statements signalling openness to negotiation, no formal agreement has been announced.
Participants in the prediction market, which allows traders to 'buy' positions on whether a ceasefire will occur by certain dates, indicate that consensus remains uncertain, with short-term predictions markedly lower than longer-term ones.
Tracking the US-Iran Ceasefire Probability
The market opened on 12 March 2026, providing a framework for citizens and analysts to gauge the likelihood of an official ceasefire, defined strictly as a publicly confirmed and mutually agreed halt to military action.
By late March, traders placed roughly a 12% chance on a ceasefire by 7 April, rising slowly to 30% for 15 April, and just 45% by the end of April.
Probabilities continued to climb steadily through the year, reaching 59% by 31 May, 65% by 30 June, and 80% by 31 December.
Market rules stipulate that informal understandings, temporary operational pauses, or unilateral ceasefires do not count. Only agreements publicly confirmed by both governments qualify, a definition designed to prevent speculation from conflating backchannel negotiations or tactical stand-downs with formal resolution.
'Any form of informal understanding, backchannel communication, de-escalation without an announced agreement, or unilateral pause in hostilities will not be considered an official ceasefire,' the market states.
Ceasefire Probability from the Public's POV
The prediction market has attracted massive attention from both traders and the non-trader public.
Many users have weighed in with commentary, with frustration and hope. One post noted that the upcoming months 'sounds like a clear ceasefire to me, people should buy yes,' while others expressed scepticism over NATO's involvement and the pace of diplomatic negotiations.
Social media activity around the market reveals a deeply divided perspective on whether military or political strategies will ultimately drive a resolution.
For context, this is not the first instance of prediction markets being used to monitor geopolitical crises. Advocates argue that they harness the 'wisdom of the crowd,' providing real-time insight into events that traditional news coverage cannot always capture. In the case of the US-Iran conflict, participants have asked dozens of detailed questions, from projected ceasefire dates to the implications for regional allies.
Official sources have yet to confirm or comment on any precise timeline for a ceasefire. US government statements emphasise readiness to negotiate but stop short of committing to a date.
Iranian officials similarly reaffirmed willingness to engage diplomatically without offering specific milestones. In this environment, the prediction market offers an alternative lens.
The gradual upward trend in market probability suggests cautious optimism that a formal ceasefire is increasingly likely later in 2026, but short-term risks remain. Traders and analysts stress that any resolution will hinge on mutual confirmation and public announcement.
While the market does not predict the terms of any agreement, it shows the evolving expectations of participants closely monitoring the conflict.
Tehran Rejects US Ceasefire Agreement
As of 26 March 2026, Iran has responded to the 15‑point ceasefire proposal from the United States, but not in the way Washington had hoped. Multiple reports indicate that Tehran has dismissed the plan rather than agreeing to it.
Iranian state media and officials have described Washington's terms as 'maximalist,' 'unreasonable,' and effectively a non‑starter, while insisting any end to the conflict must be on Iran's own terms rather than under conditions set by the US.
Some Iranian sources say the proposal was received and is under evaluation, but they have rejected direct negotiations with the Trump administration and continued military action in the region, even launching further attacks on Israeli and Gulf targets.
Iranian state media and officials have outlined a five‑point counterproposal setting out their own conditions for an end to the war.
These included a complete halt to aggression, concrete guarantees preventing future military hostilities, legal and war reparations for damage caused during the conflict, an end to fighting across all fronts including proxy theatres in the region, and lastly, recognition of Iran's sovereign authority over the Strait of Hormuz.
These demands contrast sharply with the US plan, which reportedly focuses on dismantling nuclear capabilities, limiting ballistic missiles, and securing the Strait of Hormuz.
For now, formal negotiations have not advanced, and Iran continues to reject direct talks with Washington.
Originally published on IBTimes UK
© Copyright IBTimes 2025. All rights reserved.
