Market Trust diligence packet
Counter-Strike: paiN vs Astralis (BO3) - BLAST Bounty Playoffs
One of four bands, strongest warning on the right
Participant-flow coverage is measured, but unknown flow remains material.
Use only as a review target. Current-card issues must clear before this price is used as evidence.
Market quality
60 / 100
Interval 47-65
Evidence confidence
medium
77 / 100
Source health
source gate passed
1 sources | dropped 0
Audit chain
1cb9b30e98...
row hash verified
Memo language
Convexly rates this polymarket market "Counter-Strike: paiN vs Astralis (BO3) - BLAST Bounty Playoffs" as Discount. Use only as a review target. Current-card issues must clear before this price is used as evidence. Caveat to carry: Participant-flow coverage is measured, but unknown flow remains material. This is market diligence, not a trading instruction or proof that the market probability is correct.
Caveat to carry: Participant-flow coverage is measured, but unknown flow remains material.
How to use this packet and what changes the verdict
Use this packet when
- Use to explain why a market price should receive less weight than cleaner alternatives.
- Use as a watch item while source, participant, or resolution evidence improves.
Do not use it as
- A trading instruction.
- Proof that the market probability is correct.
- A manipulation accusation or person-level identity claim.
What changes the verdict
- Clear hard cap: Participant-flow coverage is measured, but unknown flow remains material.
- Clear current blocker: The rating moves under leave-one-out or weight-perturbation checks.
- Improve robustness blocker: Coherence is heuristic, not fully measured.
How the score adds upWhy this verdict
Why this rating
Composite 60 · Discount
- Coherenceheuristicweight 25.0
No full-provenance CME signal is linked to this condition in the current ledger window; absence of a signal is not proof of coherence.
- · no linked cme signal in window
- · absence of signal not proof of coherence
- · cme signal window days: 7
- · recent full provenance signals: 100
50+15.6 - Executabilitymeasuredweight 20.0
Executability scored as worse-of(spread, depth) from a single orderbook snapshot; the two were merged from the former liquidity + depth pillars to stop double-counting one correlated source.
- · executability worse of spread depth
- · spread: top-of-book spread 1.0c
- · spread: spread is 3% of mid, tight relative to price
- · spread: pp-band-to-cents-band approximation in effect (depth_5pct_usd/2 per side); per-side decomposition pending substrate work
45+11.3 - Resolution reliabilityheuristicweight 20.0
Resolution source and rule text are present but not independently reviewed.
- · resolution metadata present manual review pending
70+17.5 - Participant flowmeasuredweight 20.0
34/173 accounts identifiable; identity coverage 73%; top-account flow share 36%; net directional flow net buy 49%. Descriptive participant flow only; not a skill or smart-money signal.
- · below publishable sample floor
- · current account score join
- · edge score composite descriptive not skill
- · high participant concentration
n/ano contrib - Integrity risk screenmeasuredweight 10.0
Mild concentration or coordination signals; review before citing.
- · 5 possible wash round-trips detected
- · top-3 wallets control 51% of notional flow
- · flow events: 608
- · distinct wallets: 173
75+9.4 - Audit completenessmeasuredweight 5.0
5 linked artifacts; 0 missing hashes; 0 stale/failing sources.
- · artifact hashes present
- · source watermarks healthy
100+6.3
How it adds up: composite = Σ(score × weight) / Σ(weight) across measured + heuristic pillars only. Pending and data-rights-blocked pillars are excluded from both numerator and denominator. Total contributing weight = 80.0.
Market identityWhat is being rated
Venue
polymarket
condition 0x0a54a4fb700e568e...
Category
Esports
used for coverage and validation breadth
Market status
active
venue-provided lifecycle state when available
Resolution rule
This market refers to the Counter-Strike Quarterfinal 1 match between paiN and Astralis in the BLAST Bounty Playoffs, initially scheduled for July 30 at 9:00AM ET. This market will resolve to "paiN" if paiN win the match against Astralis. This market will resolve to "Astralis" if Astralis win the match against paiN. If the match is canceled (not played at all), ends in a tie, or is delayed beyond 7 days from the scheduled date without a winner determined, this market will resolve to 50-50. If the match begins but is not completed, and one team wins due to the opponent's forfeiture, disqualification, or walkover, this market will resolve to the team who wins. If the match ends in a forfeit, disqualification, or walkover (team withdraws before the start and the other wins automatically), this market will resolve to 50-50. The resolution source for this market will be official information from https://hltv.org. However, if https://hltv.org has not published final results within 2 hours after the event’s conclusion, a consensus of credible reporting may be used instead including video evidence. In cases where a team’s listed name includes minor discrepancies from the resolution source, this market will resolve based on the underlying real-world match rather than exact name matching. Recognizable abbreviations, alternate or erroneous spellings, sponsor tags, affiliate or academy designations, regional identifiers, and minor formatting differences will be treated as referring to the same team, provided the intended team can be clearly and uniquely identified within the relevant competition. If a listed team name has no reasonable connection to any participating team, or if it matches or could reasonably refer to another team in the same competition such that the intended team cannot be unambiguously determined, this market will resolve 50-50.
card_id: mt-v02:polymarket:0x0a54a4fb700e568ebc95465a260bbff9905b60ecda59681a049fe68f9a55a07c:2026-07-31
market_id: 1aab0ac6-f14b-4e98-a2e2-b3fe8c10a7c0
venue_market_id: 0x0a54a4fb700e568ebc95465a260bbff9905b60ecda59681a049fe68f9a55a07c
resolution_source: https://hltv.org
Audit chainReceipt and verification
Convexly stores the card payload, removes the row_hash field, canonicalizes the remaining JSON, and recomputes the SHA-256 hash. This is the bridge from a readable verdict to a buyer-reviewable audit chain.
method: market_trust_card_v0_2
row_hash: 1cb9b30e98216a5979357068e994a2599035d7dd975be484f92cf655ce0a1b47
previous_row_hash: c488f182e1fe660d075055dad9b30633c7f482923f901243aa391a7199cd7b3a
source_artifact_hashes: 1d5d9e04c347f05468f936f860118d06355b3a981c125792a3e635f757901ca6, 9d5be71d996e354ac5260dc9aa1774b57e23ffafa4e1a694150c1c1b795406c4
Verdict hashImmutable verdict archive
This verdict is archived as a canonical JSON object with a SHA-256 content hash. The hashed payload carries the methodology version (market_trust_card_v0_2), the canary_preview label, and a fixed boundary statement; none of them can be removed without changing the digest.
verdict archive sha256: ed85e74b7fe7a39daff0d50312e6a7d2e1890bc948fb25802bff1048fb11d7db
How to verify this hash
- Fetch the canonical archive bytes: https://www.convexly.app/api/market-trust/v0.2/0x0a54a4fb700e568ebc95465a260bbff9905b60ecda59681a049fe68f9a55a07c/archive?venue=polymarket&format=canonical
- Recompute the digest locally, for example: curl -s "https://www.convexly.app/api/market-trust/v0.2/0x0a54a4fb700e568ebc95465a260bbff9905b60ecda59681a049fe68f9a55a07c/archive?venue=polymarket&format=canonical" | shasum -a 256
- Compare your digest to archive_sha256 in the JSON response at https://www.convexly.app/api/market-trust/v0.2/0x0a54a4fb700e568ebc95465a260bbff9905b60ecda59681a049fe68f9a55a07c/archive?venue=polymarket. Matching digests mean the archived verdict content is byte-for-byte unchanged.
- Cross-check card_row_hash against the stored full-card receipt at https://www.convexly.app/api/market-trust/v0.2/0x0a54a4fb700e568ebc95465a260bbff9905b60ecda59681a049fe68f9a55a07c/verify?venue=polymarket.
Stored v0.2 cards are frozen scorecards: a re-score inserts a new row with a new card_id and records the prior receipt in previous_row_hash, and the filed calibration design binds Convexly to never mutate frozen card-time rows. The archive is a deterministic serialization of one stored row, so the same row always reproduces the same archive_sha256.
Participant and integrity screenWho shaped the price
Participant-flow screens flagged concentration, unknown-flow, or low-edge-flow conditions for review. This is an integrity-risk screen, not a manipulation accusation and not person-level identity resolution.
Scored flow
73.4%
34 scored accounts
Unknown flow
26.6%
higher unknown flow lowers confidence
Participants
173
public accounts observed
Top flow share
35.5%
concentration diagnostic
Not claiming: wash-trading detection; sybil detection; manipulation-free market.
Market Fitness - pre-trade diligence (experimental)
5 of 6 diagnostics have a derivable observable on this stored card; 1 are insufficient_data. An insufficient_data row means the card lacks that input, not that the check passed.
Depth and slippage at size is a Researcher feature.
The resolution-reliability, manipulation, and basis-risk reads below are open. To see the fill cost at $100 / $1k / $10k and the executability detail, upgrade to Researcher.
Depth durability
measured
insufficient data
At-size depth and slippage detail is a Researcher feature. Upgrade at /pricing to see fill cost at size.
Observable: Executability pillar: worse-of(top-of-book spread, modeled price impact) from the latest inspected orderbook snapshot at 2026-07-31T18:45:58.454+00:00
Caveats: derived from a single orderbook snapshot; durability across time is not yet measured on this card; descriptive diagnostic from operator-set scoring that is not calibrated; no interval exists for this value, so none is shown rather than fabricated; gated detail requires researcher
Spread and price impact
measured
insufficient data
At-size depth and slippage detail is a Researcher feature. Upgrade at /pricing to see fill cost at size.
Observable: Top-of-book spread (price points) and modeled price impact for a fixed notional, from the latest inspected orderbook snapshot
Caveats: spread cost over a holding period is not modeled; this is a single-snapshot read; descriptive diagnostic from operator-set scoring that is not calibrated; no interval exists for this value, so none is shown rather than fabricated; gated detail requires researcher
Time to resolution
insufficient data
insufficient data
Venue lifecycle status on the card: active. No end date is stored.
Observable: Venue-supplied market end date or close time stored on the card
Missing input: The v0.2 card schema does not store an end date or close time, so time to resolution cannot be derived from this card.
Resolution reliability
heuristic
70 / 100 (descriptive)
Resolution source and rule text are present but not independently reviewed. Resolution rule text is stored on the card.
Observable: Resolution reliability pillar: review of the resolution source (https://hltv.org) and stored resolution rule text
Caveats: resolved-outcome dispute history is not joined on this card; the read covers resolution source and rule text only; descriptive diagnostic from operator-set scoring that is not calibrated; no interval exists for this value, so none is shown rather than fabricated
Concentration exposure
measured
35.5%
Top account flow share 35.5%; unknown flow share 26.6%; scored notional share 73.4%. Flags: high participant concentration, unknown or low sample flow present.
Observable: Participant-flow concentration from the card's integrity screen: top account flow share, unknown flow share, scored notional share
Caveats: concentration diagnostic, not a manipulation finding and not person-level identity resolution; descriptive diagnostic from operator-set scoring that is not calibrated; no interval exists for this value, so none is shown rather than fabricated
Basis-risk note
descriptive
structural note
This market settles as a binary event contract: it pays a fixed amount on one discrete resolution. Offsetting a continuous exposure with a binary payoff leaves residual basis risk by construction, and binary payoffs will generally fail the ASC 815 80-125% dollar-offset band used for hedge-accounting treatment, so a position that works as an economic offset can still be carried as mark-to-market P&L. This is a structural description of the contract type, not a statement about any party's exposure.
Observable: Contract payoff structure (binary event contract) and the resolution rule text stored on the card
Caveats: structural description of the contract type, not accounting or legal advice
Published deliberately as a component table with no single combined number. Read each component against the observable it derives from; an insufficient_data row means the stored card lacks that input, not that the check passed.
These diagnostics describe observable market-quality measurements for one market. They are not investment advice, not a trading instruction, not a recommendation to take or offset any exposure with this or any market, and not a statement about any person or their positions.
instrument_fitness_diagnostics_v0_1
Source freshness windowIngest status
The current ingest window is clean enough for review. This is freshness reporting, not an uptime SLA.
Latest orderbook
2026-07-31T18:45:58.454Z
most recent orderbook evidence attached to this card
Sources
1
1 healthy | 0 degraded | 0 stale | 0 failing
Dropped events
0
nonzero dropped events block current-language claims
Observed age
421ms
oldest observed source watermark
Ingested age
325ms
oldest ingest watermark
Validation stateCanary vs v1
Canary pipeline
blocked
Current card has source, evidence, or robustness issues to clear.
Public v1 promotion
4 public v1 validation gates still open.
Canary readiness says the current batch can be reviewed. Public v1 promotion waits for coverage, clean source-health windows, resolved outcomes, and formula-freeze evidence.
Read the promotion evidence contract- The rating moves under leave-one-out or weight-perturbation checks.
- 14 consecutive clean source-health days have not yet been observed.
- 30 current cards across 3 market categories are not yet reached.
- The scoring formula must be frozen before validation runs.
- At least one resolved-outcome row is still needed in the validation ledger.
Top caveatsWhat travels with the score
- Hard cap: Participant-flow coverage is measured, but unknown flow remains material.
- Current card issue: The rating moves under leave-one-out or weight-perturbation checks.
- 5 possible wash round-trips detected
- absence of signal not proof of coherence
- artifact hashes present
- below publishable sample floor
Before stable v1Validation requirements
- 14 consecutive clean source-health days have not yet been observed.
- 30 current cards across 3 market categories are not yet reached.
- The scoring formula must be frozen before validation runs.
- At least one resolved-outcome row is still needed in the validation ledger.
External contextNon-scoring provenance
No external baseline family is mapped for this market yet.
No external baseline family is mapped for this market yet.
External context is non-scoring in v0.2. Market Trust still measures market-quality substrate, not absolute truth against outside forecasts.
Full seven-pillar evidence grid
Coherence
weight 25 · heuristic
50 / 100
No full-provenance CME signal is linked to this condition in the current ledger window; absence of a signal is not proof of coherence.
Executability
weight 20 · measured
45 / 100
Executability scored as worse-of(spread, depth) from a single orderbook snapshot; the two were merged from the former liquidity + depth pillars to stop double-counting one correlated source.
Resolution reliability
weight 20 · heuristic
70 / 100
Resolution source and rule text are present but not independently reviewed.
Participant flow
weight 20 · measured
pending
34/173 accounts identifiable; identity coverage 73%; top-account flow share 36%; net directional flow net buy 49%. Descriptive participant flow only; not a skill or smart-money signal.
Integrity risk screen
weight 10 · measured
75 / 100
Mild concentration or coordination signals; review before citing.
Audit completeness
weight 5 · measured
100 / 100
5 linked artifacts; 0 missing hashes; 0 stale/failing sources.
Coherence blockLinked-market consistency
No full-provenance CME signal is linked to this condition in the current ledger window; absence of a signal is not proof of coherence.
Score
50
heuristic evidence
Source refs
0
linked-market or CME artifacts
no linked cme signal in window absence of signal not proof of coherence cme signal window days:7 recent full provenance signals:100
Robustness blockSensitivity and drivers
Sensitivity verdict
moves
leave-one-out and weight perturbation
Leave-one-out
57-65
score range
Weight perturbation
59-61
score range
Drivers
3
largest weighted contributors
- Coherence is heuristic, not fully measured.
- Coherence scores below 60 and needs stronger evidence before the verdict can improve.
- Executability scores below 60 and needs stronger evidence before the verdict can improve.
- Resolution reliability is heuristic, not fully measured.
Live market integrity read is a Trader feature
Trader ($499/mo) unlocks an on-demand participation-concentration read on any market — HHI of wallet volume shares with a confidence interval on every estimate, plus a round-trip self-churn share, computed live from the current flow tape. Descriptive structure with receipts, not a manipulation call.
Boundary of the packet
This packet is market diligence, not investment advice, not a claim of absolute truth, and not proof that any trader should buy or sell. It answers whether the market price has enough substrate to cite, monitor, discount, or ignore with receipts attached.