Market Trust diligence packet

Dota 2: Team Yandex vs Team Spirit - Game 2 Winner

Do not citeCurrent daily snapshot
UseUse with caveatsDiscountDo not cite

One of four bands, strongest warning on the right

Too much of the trading came from wallets we cannot yet identify, so participant-flow coverage is uncertain.

Use only as a review target. Current-card issues must clear before this price is used as evidence.

Market quality

65 / 100

Interval 30-77

Evidence confidence

low

45 / 100

Source health

source gate passed

1 sources | dropped 0

Audit chain

638c91c8be...

row hash verified

Memo language

Convexly rates this polymarket market "Dota 2: Team Yandex vs Team Spirit - Game 2 Winner" as Do not cite.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: Too much participant flow is unknown while participant-flow coverage is still pending. This is market diligence, not a trading instruction or proof that the market probability is correct.

Caveat to carry: Too much participant flow is unknown while participant-flow coverage is still pending.

Export
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 hard cap: Too much participant flow is unknown while participant-flow coverage is still pending.
  • Clear current blocker: Not enough pillars on this card are measured yet.
  • Clear current blocker: Some pillars on this card are still gathering evidence.
How the score adds upWhy this verdict
1 measured | 3 heuristic | 2 pending

Why this rating

Composite 65 · Do not cite

1 measured3 heuristic2 pending
  • 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: 171
    50+20.8
  • Executabilitypendingweight 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: one_sided_orderbook_boundary
    • · spread: direct_bid_ask_spread_missing
    • · spread: visible $1k ladder slippage 0pp
    65no contrib
  • Resolution reliabilityheuristicweight 20.0

    Resolution source and rule text are present but not independently reviewed.

    • · resolution metadata present manual review pending
    70+23.3
  • Participant flowpendingweight 20.0

    Participant flow inputs exist but do not meet identity-coverage floors; descriptive only.

    • · below publishable sample floor
    • · current account score join
    • · edge score composite descriptive not skill
    • · high participant concentration
    n/ano contrib
  • Integrity risk screenheuristicweight 10.0

    Mild concentration or coordination signals; review before citing.

    • · top-3 wallets control 84% of notional flow
    • · flow events: 49
    • · distinct wallets: 33
    • · wash round trips: 0
    75+12.5
  • Audit completenessmeasuredweight 5.0

    3 linked artifacts; 0 missing hashes; 0 stale/failing sources.

    • · artifact hashes present
    • · source watermarks healthy
    100+8.3

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 = 60.0.

Caveat: 2 pillars pending; the score will recompute as the substrate fills in.

Market identityWhat is being rated

Venue

polymarket

condition 0x6266a812b672fb04...

Category

Esports

used for coverage and validation breadth

Market status

active

venue-provided lifecycle state when available

Resolution rule

This market refers to the Dota 2 Quarterfinal 3 match between Team Yandex and Team Spirit in the Esports World Cup Playoffs, initially scheduled for July 17 at 7:00AM ET. This market will resolve to "Team Yandex" if Team Yandex win Game 2 against Team Spirit. This market will resolve to "Team Spirit" if Team Spirit win Game 2 against Team Yandex. If the match begins but is not completed, and Game 2 is concluded with a winner determined, this market will resolve based on the completed Game 2. If Game 2 is not completed for any reason, this market will resolve 50-50. If the match is canceled (not played at all) or is delayed beyond 7 days from the scheduled date without play beginning, this market will resolve 50-50. The resolution source for this market will be official information from https://www.dotabuff.com. However, if https://www.dotabuff.com 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.

card_id: mt-v02:polymarket:0x6266a812b672fb0424235909307279a2d4f52ad291b00e4a85767c146d10a2c0:2026-07-16

market_id: ccc441f6-d50c-4c70-a8a0-bc4947f7954c

venue_market_id: 0x6266a812b672fb0424235909307279a2d4f52ad291b00e4a85767c146d10a2c0

resolution_source: https://www.dotabuff.com

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.

market-trust-v02:2026-07-16T15-01-34-487Z

method: market_trust_card_v0_2

row_hash: 638c91c8be1d2caf8e6ecfc03f18fe79805670918079095a5f37d54412e7de25

previous_row_hash: 665598053581b7c7b22af26835be45477c843ada4ac1da59a2bf6a73081bf094

source_artifact_hashes: 33ffe8e6f86cc7d5a66f0ae9779f2fe56c98c8f97bd3d1fe844f8464f1444b6d, a6c080bc9b956eccc4c4e4ee366862a144a455d259d99130bbc17bbf5cbdc851

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: 553a1834313d7aaf25d9b5672d73f74426297c214b4aed15e601fc5f27d701df

How to verify this hash
  1. Fetch the canonical archive bytes: https://www.convexly.app/api/market-trust/v0.2/0x6266a812b672fb0424235909307279a2d4f52ad291b00e4a85767c146d10a2c0/archive?venue=polymarket&format=canonical
  2. Recompute the digest locally, for example: curl -s "https://www.convexly.app/api/market-trust/v0.2/0x6266a812b672fb0424235909307279a2d4f52ad291b00e4a85767c146d10a2c0/archive?venue=polymarket&format=canonical" | shasum -a 256
  3. Compare your digest to archive_sha256 in the JSON response at https://www.convexly.app/api/market-trust/v0.2/0x6266a812b672fb0424235909307279a2d4f52ad291b00e4a85767c146d10a2c0/archive?venue=polymarket. Matching digests mean the archived verdict content is byte-for-byte unchanged.
  4. Cross-check card_row_hash against the stored full-card receipt at https://www.convexly.app/api/market-trust/v0.2/0x6266a812b672fb0424235909307279a2d4f52ad291b00e4a85767c146d10a2c0/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

3.7%

8 scored accounts

Unknown flow

96.3%

higher unknown flow lowers confidence

Participants

33

public accounts observed

Top flow share

70.4%

concentration diagnostic

high participant concentrationhigh unknown flow shareunknown or low sample flow present

Not claiming: wash-trading detection; sybil detection; manipulation-free market.

Market Fitness - pre-trade diligence (experimental)

2 of 6 diagnostics have a derivable observable on this stored card; 4 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

insufficient data

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 2026-07-16T15:00:13.007+00:00

Missing input: The stored card has no measured or heuristic executability pillar value (no current orderbook spread or depth input).

Caveats: gated detail requires researcher

Spread and price impact

insufficient data

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

Missing input: The stored card has no current orderbook spread or modeled price-impact input.

Caveats: 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://www.dotabuff.com) 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

2026-07-16T15:00:13.007Z

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

1m

oldest observed source watermark

Ingested age

1m

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
  • Hard cap: Too much participant flow is unknown while participant-flow coverage is still pending.
  • 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.
  • absence of signal not proof of coherence
  • artifact hashes present
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

External sports baselines are identified for review but are not part of the Market Trust score.

Sportsbook consensus line

not integrated

Roster / availability feed

not integrated

Historical base-rate benchmark

not integrated

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.

no linked cme signal in windowabsence of signal not proof of coherencecme signal window days:7

Executability

weight 20 · pending

65 / 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.

executability worse of spread depthspread:one sided orderbook boundaryspread:direct bid ask spread missing

Resolution reliability

weight 20 · heuristic

70 / 100

Resolution source and rule text are present but not independently reviewed.

resolution metadata present manual review pending

Participant flow

weight 20 · pending

pending

Participant flow inputs exist but do not meet identity-coverage floors; descriptive only.

below publishable sample floorcurrent account score joinedge score composite descriptive not skill

Integrity risk screen

weight 10 · heuristic

75 / 100

Mild concentration or coordination signals; review before citing.

top-3 wallets control 84% of notional flowflow events:49distinct wallets:33

Audit completeness

weight 5 · measured

100 / 100

3 linked artifacts; 0 missing hashes; 0 stale/failing sources.

artifact hashes presentsource watermarks healthy
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:171

Robustness blockSensitivity and drivers

Sensitivity verdict

moves

leave-one-out and weight perturbation

Leave-one-out

63-72

score range

Weight perturbation

64-66

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 is pending, not fully measured.
  • Resolution reliability is heuristic, not fully measured.
  • Participant flow is pending, not fully measured.
  • Integrity screen 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.