Market Trust diligence packet
Will Benjamin Netanyahu visit New York City by September 30?
2 of 6 pillars measured, 2 modeled by fixed rules, 2 not assessed. Certainty reflects how much of this market we measured, not how good the market is.
One of four bands, strongest warning on the right
Some quality checks score low, so the rating is held at its floor even though the price is easy to trade and the data is fresh.
Use only as a review target. Current-card issues must clear before this price is used as evidence.
Market quality
45 / 100
Interval 7-55
Evidence confidence
low
52 / 100
Source health
source gate passed
1 sources | dropped 0
Audit chain
e0bd9c801b...
row hash verified
Memo language
Convexly rates this polymarket market "Will Benjamin Netanyahu visit New York City by September 30?" as Do not cite. Use only as a review target. Current-card issues must clear before this price is used as evidence. Caveat to carry: Current card issue: Not enough pillars on this card are measured yet. This is market diligence, not a trading instruction or proof that the market probability is correct.
Caveat to carry: Current card issue: Not enough pillars on this card are measured yet.
How to cite this market
Per Convexly Market Trust, an experimental market-quality diagnostic served as a research preview (status: canary_preview), the polymarket market "Will Benjamin Netanyahu visit New York City by September 30?" is rated Do not cite (market quality 45 / 100; Interval 7-55) as of 2026-08-08T18:30:20.497Z (UTC). Caveat to carry: Current card issue: Not enough pillars on this card are measured yet. Packet: https://www.convexly.app/market-trust/packet/polymarket/0x236fabcdc7506a5bde811505d8dc35863599dfea80ac3d39ac6f6d28dc922b08. Verdict row hash (SHA-256): e0bd9c801b7465a022f7584c893223db40b90697c69b804f8b157299b760a4d8. This citation is market diligence, not investment advice, not a trading instruction, not a forecast, and not proof that the market probability is correct.
One unit: quote it whole, so the verdict travels with its caveat, its date and its receipt.
How to use this packet and what changes the verdict
Use this packet when
- Use to explain why this market should stay out of a citation set for now.
- Use as a recovery checklist for source freshness, coherence, depth, or evidence gaps.
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 current blocker: Not enough pillars on this card are measured yet.
- Clear current blocker: Some pillars on this card are still gathering evidence.
- Clear current blocker: The rating moves under leave-one-out or weight-perturbation checks.
How the score adds upWhy this verdict
Why this rating
Composite 45 · Do not cite
Measurement certainty
Low
2 measured · 2 modeled · 2 not assessed
Certainty reflects how much of this market we measured, not how good the market is.
- CoherenceMeasuredlow readingweight 25.0
3 full-provenance Coherent Markets Engine signals linked to this condition; 17 price-observation checkpoints recorded.
- · full provenance cme signal linked
- · signal price observations linked
- · no observed checkpoint yet
30+10.7 - ExecutabilityModeled estimatefixed rules, not a per-market measurementweight 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 1% 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
15+4.3 - Resolution reliabilityModeled estimatefixed rules, not a per-market measurementweight 20.0
Resolution source and rule text are present but not independently reviewed.
- · resolution metadata present manual review pending
70+20.0 - Participant flowNot assessednot yet measured for this marketweight 20.0
Participant flow inputs exist but do not meet identity-coverage floors; descriptive only.
- · below publishable sample floor
- · edge score composite descriptive not skill
- · high participant concentration
- · insufficient scored accounts
not assessednot assessed - Integrity risk screenNot assessednot yet measured for this marketweight 10.0
Mild concentration or coordination signals; review before citing.
- · top-3 wallets control 99% of notional flow
- · 25% of wallet/side pairs appear repeatedly
- · flow events: 6
- · distinct wallets: 4
67not assessed - Audit completenessMeasuredweight 5.0
3 linked artifacts; 0 missing hashes; 0 stale/failing sources.
- · artifact hashes present
- · source watermarks healthy
100+7.1
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 = 70.0.
Caveat: 2 pillars not assessed yet; the score will recompute as the substrate fills in.
Market identityWhat is being rated
Venue
polymarket
condition 0x236fabcdc7506a5b...
Category
Israel
used for coverage and validation breadth
Market status
active
venue-provided lifecycle state when available
Resolution rule
This market will resolve to “Yes” if Benjamin Netanyahu visits New York City between market creation and the listed date, 11:59 PM ET, Otherwise, this market will resolve to “No.” A “visit” refers to Netanyahu physically entering any of the five boroughs of New York City: Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, the Bronx, or Staten Island. Entering New York City’s territorial waters will not qualify. Merely transiting through New York City airspace will not qualify. Landing at any airport within New York City will qualify only if Netanyahu leaves the airport. The resolution source will be a consensus of credible reporting.
Rules as stated by the venue, reproduced verbatim; not independently reviewed or endorsed by Convexly.
card_id: mt-v02:polymarket:0x236fabcdc7506a5bde811505d8dc35863599dfea80ac3d39ac6f6d28dc922b08:2026-08-08
market_id: c44c4eb4-b9cc-42a4-a82a-e6435de98783
venue_market_id: 0x236fabcdc7506a5bde811505d8dc35863599dfea80ac3d39ac6f6d28dc922b08
resolution_source: 0x65070BE91477460D8A7AeEb94ef92fe056C2f2A7
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: e0bd9c801b7465a022f7584c893223db40b90697c69b804f8b157299b760a4d8
previous_row_hash: eaff666b9d4d1b4c19b6fb1f341e578dc829d1c3c254b36de4a8583c8ef9b25c
source_artifact_hashes: 2072d99817a469c9a02c6da76449784056a72b55bef39ea0d14d167dd0618528, 690309a64b5b0c13460bbd03c26f9f78110bfd8e02ab948e91d7693d0394ecc3
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: 05a799df789fb4baf56bd47fb2a99d3514dc53e655176fcc9ee9ce129360cf4e
How to verify this hash
- Fetch the canonical archive bytes: https://www.convexly.app/api/market-trust/v0.2/0x236fabcdc7506a5bde811505d8dc35863599dfea80ac3d39ac6f6d28dc922b08/archive?venue=polymarket&format=canonical
- Recompute the digest locally, for example: curl -s "https://www.convexly.app/api/market-trust/v0.2/0x236fabcdc7506a5bde811505d8dc35863599dfea80ac3d39ac6f6d28dc922b08/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/v0.2/0x236fabcdc7506a5bde811505d8dc35863599dfea80ac3d39ac6f6d28dc922b08/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/v0.2/0x236fabcdc7506a5bde811505d8dc35863599dfea80ac3d39ac6f6d28dc922b08/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
87.4%
3 scored accounts
Unknown flow
12.6%
higher unknown flow lowers confidence
Participants
4
public accounts observed
Top flow share
59.8%
concentration diagnostic
Not claiming: wash-trading detection; sybil detection; manipulation-free market.
Market Fitness - pre-trade diligence (experimental)
4 of 6 diagnostics have a derivable observable on this stored card; 2 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
heuristic
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 2026-08-08T18:30:08.027+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
heuristic
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 (0x65070BE91477460D8A7AeEb94ef92fe056C2f2A7) 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
insufficient data
insufficient data
Participant-flow screens flagged concentration, unknown-flow, or low-edge-flow conditions for review.
Observable: Participant-flow concentration from the card's integrity screen: top account flow share, unknown flow share, scored notional share
Missing input: Participant-flow concentration is not measured on this card (no scored participant rollup or no top-account flow share).
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
2026-08-08T18:30:08.027Z
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
2s
oldest observed source watermark
Ingested age
604ms
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- Not enough pillars on this card are measured yet.
- Some pillars on this card are still gathering evidence.
- 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
- Current card issue: Not enough pillars on this card are measured yet.
- Current card issue: Some pillars on this card are still gathering evidence.
- Current card issue: The rating moves under leave-one-out or weight-perturbation checks.
- 25% of wallet/side pairs appear repeatedly
- 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 · measured
30 / 100
3 full-provenance Coherent Markets Engine signals linked to this condition; 17 price-observation checkpoints recorded.
Executability
weight 20 · heuristic
15 / 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 · pending
pending
Participant flow inputs exist but do not meet identity-coverage floors; descriptive only.
Integrity risk screen
weight 10 · pending
67 / 100
Mild concentration or coordination signals; review before citing.
Audit completeness
weight 5 · measured
100 / 100
3 linked artifacts; 0 missing hashes; 0 stale/failing sources.
Coherence blockLinked-market consistency
3 full-provenance Coherent Markets Engine signals linked to this condition; 17 price-observation checkpoints recorded.
Score
30
measured evidence
Source refs
3
linked-market or CME artifacts
full provenance cme signal linked signal price observations linked no observed checkpoint yet
Robustness blockSensitivity and drivers
Sensitivity verdict
moves
leave-one-out and weight perturbation
Leave-one-out
37-55
score range
Weight perturbation
44-47
score range
Drivers
3
largest weighted contributors
- Coherence scores below 60 and needs stronger evidence before the verdict can improve.
- Executability is heuristic, not fully measured.
- Executability scores below 60 and needs stronger evidence before the verdict can improve.
- Resolution reliability is heuristic, not fully measured.
- Participant flow is pending, not fully measured.
- Integrity screen is pending, 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.