Market Trust diligence packet

Will the price of Bitcoin be above $64,000 on August 1?

Do not citeAging (26.8h old)
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.

Monitor, but do not cite as current. The evidence is useful as an archived read until the data freshness window refreshes.

Freshness gate: Diligence packet is outside the current daily window. Show as latest archived evidence until the next fresh run lands.

Market quality

53 / 100

Interval 17-63

Evidence confidence

low

51 / 100

Source health

source gate passed

1 sources | dropped 0

Audit chain

f18e70e22c...

row hash verified

Memo language

Convexly rates this polymarket market "Will the price of Bitcoin be above $64,000 on August 1?" as Do not cite.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
2 measured | 2 heuristic | 2 pending

Why this rating

Composite 53 · Do not cite

2 measured2 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: 80
    50+17.9
  • 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 0.1c
    • · 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
    15+4.3
  • Resolution reliabilityheuristicweight 20.0

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

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

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

    • · below publishable sample floor
    • · high unknown flow share
    • · insufficient scored accounts
    • · insufficient scored notional share
    n/ano contrib
  • Integrity risk screenpendingweight 10.0

    Mild concentration or coordination signals; review before citing.

    • · top-3 wallets control 76% of notional flow
    • · flow events: 6
    • · distinct wallets: 6
    • · wash round trips: 0
    75no contrib
  • Audit completenessmeasuredweight 5.0

    5 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 pending; the score will recompute as the substrate fills in.

Market identityWhat is being rated

Venue

polymarket

condition 0xc5f63ad1baf80c08...

Category

unmapped

used for coverage and validation breadth

Market status

active

venue-provided lifecycle state when available

Resolution rule

This market will resolve to "Yes" if the Binance 1 minute candle for BTC/USDT 12:00 in the ET timezone (noon) on the date specified in the title has a final "Close" price higher than the price specified in the title. Otherwise, this market will resolve to "No". The resolution source for this market is Binance, specifically the BTC/USDT "Close" prices currently available at https://www.binance.com/en/trade/BTC_USDT with "1m" and "Candles" selected on the top bar. Please note that this market is about the price according to Binance BTC/USDT, not according to other exchanges or trading pairs. Price precision is determined by the number of decimal places in the source.

card_id: mt-v02:polymarket:0xc5f63ad1baf80c0862f55162dde403a69996b8b7b361d328a00d2e818bd28d9f:2026-08-01

market_id: 5c87a76c-39e7-4618-ab78-e616a37284e8

venue_market_id: 0xc5f63ad1baf80c0862f55162dde403a69996b8b7b361d328a00d2e818bd28d9f

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.

market-trust-v02:2026-08-01T08-45-24-801Z

method: market_trust_card_v0_2

row_hash: f18e70e22ce4ef2d8ebd5f40d242dcf46b923a81ec3a144c1e356f6b5475ba8f

previous_row_hash: 4eda0f425b0e999a26cf7e7cb8b614cc243533fd06bdc46861444d136d4860ba

source_artifact_hashes: 56be3df02f757deac3532eed04230f3806902eb6887b5e6a01763cff8f35adca, 3f70d96228e149984d74e0ffe1095ded92fc40250e221a88f8b3953e1c060aba

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: 5e91fc36fb29ce783b03a73f7fdaa38345c573001d1cdfc9c2f689e6d56ab31e

How to verify this hash
  1. Fetch the canonical archive bytes: https://www.convexly.app/api/market-trust/v0.2/0xc5f63ad1baf80c0862f55162dde403a69996b8b7b361d328a00d2e818bd28d9f/archive?venue=polymarket&format=canonical
  2. Recompute the digest locally, for example: curl -s "https://www.convexly.app/api/market-trust/v0.2/0xc5f63ad1baf80c0862f55162dde403a69996b8b7b361d328a00d2e818bd28d9f/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/v0.2/0xc5f63ad1baf80c0862f55162dde403a69996b8b7b361d328a00d2e818bd28d9f/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/v0.2/0xc5f63ad1baf80c0862f55162dde403a69996b8b7b361d328a00d2e818bd28d9f/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

0%

0 scored accounts

Unknown flow

100%

higher unknown flow lowers confidence

Participants

6

public accounts observed

Top flow share

31.5%

concentration diagnostic

high unknown flow sharemoderate participant concentrationunknown or low sample flow present

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

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 2026-08-01T08:44:01.513+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 (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

2026-08-01T08:44:01.513Z

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

637ms

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

Spot index / reference price

not integrated

Perpetual funding and basis

not integrated

Options-implied distribution

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 · measured

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.

executability worse of spread depthspread:top-of-book spread 0.1cspread:spread is 3% of mid, tight relative to price

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 floorhigh unknown flow shareinsufficient scored accounts

Integrity risk screen

weight 10 · pending

75 / 100

Mild concentration or coordination signals; review before citing.

top-3 wallets control 76% of notional flowflow events:6distinct wallets:6

Audit completeness

weight 5 · measured

100 / 100

5 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:80

Robustness blockSensitivity and drivers

Sensitivity verdict

moves

leave-one-out and weight perturbation

Leave-one-out

47-65

score range

Weight perturbation

51-54

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.
  • 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.