Regulatory sensitivity
Exposure to political, legal, or government-dependent outcomes. Higher means more external intervention risk.
54
High
- Named public official
- Geopolitical or state actor
- Policy implementation dependency
Medium Risk
Some ambiguity present. Human review recommended before large positions.
Moderate rule clarity (63/100). The market is generally well-structured with solid time clarity and outcome definition. Note: No explicit resolution source URL or reference provided. Ambiguity is limited but traders should review the full resolution criteria before trading.
Independent from the Rule Clarity Score
Regulatory sensitivity
Exposure to political, legal, or government-dependent outcomes. Higher means more external intervention risk.
54
High
Trading liquidity
Execution quality based on depth, turnover, lifetime volume, and quoted spread. Higher means easier entry and exit.
86
Low
Six weighted criteria
Time Clarity
How clearly the resolution deadline and time parameters are defined.
Resolution timeline is explicitly defined with a specific date and time reference.
20/20
Resolution Source
Whether an authoritative, verifiable data source is named.
A resolution source is indicated but lacks specificity or a verifiable URL.
9/20
Outcome Definition
How precisely the YES/NO resolution conditions are specified.
Outcome conditions are precisely defined with explicit YES/NO resolution criteria.
18/20
Evidence Standard
Whether acceptable and excluded evidence types are documented.
Evidence standards are implied by context but not formally defined.
5/15
Edge Case Handling
Coverage of delays, revisions, cancellations, and disputed data.
Basic edge cases may be implied but are not explicitly documented in the rules.
5/15
Post-Trade Risk
Risk of retroactive re-interpretation after the market closes.
Moderate post-trade risk — some resolution criteria could be interpreted differently.
6/10
How this market settles
No on-chain dispute record available
Polymarket markets resolve via the UMA Optimistic Oracle on Polygon. The Gamma API did not return dispute metadata for this market, so no challenge history can be confirmed here.
Volume
$417K
24h Change
+2.1pp
Liquidity
$73K
24h Volume
$114K
End Date
January 1, 2027 at 04:59 AM UTC
Resolution Source
No authoritative source is named for resolving this market. This increases the risk of subjective or disputed resolution outcomes.
Run a semantic analysis of this market's resolution criteria using an LLM. The AI identifies logical contradictions, ambiguous language, and missing definitions that rule-based scoring may miss.
Deterministic score: 63/100 · Risk level: Medium
0 votes cast
Sign in to add your assessment of this market's resolution risk.
Matched by topic and entities
Will Gold (GC) hit (HIGH) $5,000 by end of December?
Will Gold (GC) hit (HIGH) $4,500 by end of December?
Will Gold (GC) dip to (LOW) $3,500 by end of December?
Will Gold (GC) dip to (LOW) $3,000 by end of December?
Will Gold (GC) dip to (LOW) $2,500 by end of December?
Description
This market will resolve to “Yes” if both Denmark and the United States sign a deal, treaty, or similar international agreement of any kind relating to Greenland by December 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to “No”. Any U.S.–Danish agreement relating to Greenland will qualify, regardless of subject matter, including but not limited to sovereignty, governance, security arrangements, or access to natural resources. Examples of qualifying deals include but are not limited to a treaty that makes any portion of Greenland a U.S. territory or possession (even if the handover date for such territory or possession is later); or, a Guantánamo-style arrangement treaty establishing a defined zone in Greenland under exclusive or primary U.S. jurisdiction and control, where Denmark and Greenland’s ordinary legal authority does not apply except by U.S. permission; or agreements permitting additional U.S. troop stationing, basing access, or resource extraction rights in Greenland. This market will resolve to “Yes” only if a qualifying agreement is formally signed by authorized representatives of both Denmark and the United States. Official announcements, statements of intent, or declarations that an agreement has been reached will not suffice unless accompanied by signatures from both sides. Whether or not a qualifying deal is later passed by the respective parliaments or enters into force will not affect this market’s resolution. Signaling from Greenland’s population will not be considered. Announcements, negotiations, proposals, frameworks, or understandings that are not formally signed by both parties will not qualify. Any qualifying U.S. jurisdiction, control, basing rights, or access arrangements in Greenland that existed at market creation will not count as new qualifying agreements. The primary resolution source for this market will be official information from the governments of the United States and Denmark; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.
Outcomes