Market Trust
ExperimentalDecide whether a market price is strong enough to cite.
Paste a market and get one of four answers, with the caveat and receipt attached: use it, use it with caveats, discount it, or do not cite it. During canary calibration most prices land at discount or do not cite: that is the diagnostic doing its job, not a gap.
Strong enough only with the current evidence trail attached.
Useful, but the caveats should travel with the number.
A weak input for decisions until missing evidence improves.
Too thin, stale, incoherent, or unresolved to rely on.
One scale, strongest warning on the right · 6 markets graded in the canary preview set
Market Trust remains a preview until resolved-outcome history and the frozen validation contract are mature enough for v1.
More views+
1. Start with use, use with caveats, discount, or do not cite.
2. Carry the caveat with the market price.
3. Open the receipt only when you need the technical proof.
Experimental rating caveat
Market Trust Cards are experimental market-quality diagnostics, not compliance certifications or validated credit ratings.
Market-quality scorecard
One plain-English status plus a pillar-by-pillar explanation of whether a market is currently usable, caveated, discounted, or too weak to rely on.
Visible caveats
v0.2 separates measured inputs from heuristics, so a buyer can see which parts of the rating are mature and which are still evidence collection.
Audit trail
Each card carries source artifacts and a row hash, linking the public card back to the reproducible Convexly research ledger.
Future stable-card shape
A stable card must answer the buyer's next question.
This is still a preview surface. A stable rating is not just a higher score. It is a card a user can cite in a memo because the verdict, evidence, limits, and next action are all visible together.
Verdict
Can I quote this probability?
Use, use with caveats, discount, or do not cite, with the exact methodology version attached.
Evidence
What supports the verdict?
Coherence, depth, participant quality, resolution reliability, integrity-risk screens, and source health.
Limits
What is missing or blocked?
Unknown flow share, stale snapshots, dropped events, data-rights gaps, and heuristic inputs travel with the score.
Next action
What should I do with it?
Cite with caveats, monitor for freshness, request a partner feed, or wait for resolved-outcome evidence.
Current canary
Current candidate cards with visible evidence boundaries.
These cards come from the current Market Trust candidate table. They are useful for internal review and buyer demos, but remain a preview until freshness, coverage, and outcome-history gates stay green over time.
Will Bernie endorse James Talarico for TX-Sen by Nov 2 2026 ET?
Bottom line
Do not cite. Use only as a review target. Current-card issues must clear before this price is used as evidence.
On this market the binding constraint is Coherence (30/100): Not enough pillars on this card are measured yet.
This 0–100 score grades the market’s quality and citability, not its odds; a market can trade at any probability and still score low.
Trust score /100
37
interval 3-46
Evidence
2 measured
3 heuristic · 1 pending
Freshness
current
<1h lag
Current card issue: Not enough pillars on this card are measured yet.
Executive answer
Do not cite: treat this as a market-diligence snapshot, not a price forecast.
Technical score waterfall +
Math guardrails
Quality
37
interval 3-46
Confidence
48
low
Driver
participant quality pending high unknown flow
Sensitivity
stable under sensitivity
Participant substrate
Pillar
pending
Scored flow
0%
0/1 accounts
Unknown flow
100%
verdict capped
artifact_hashes_present
Evidence: 2 measured · 3 heuristic · 1 pending · 0 blocked
audit d9b266cc6f3194bd5263672231c027eb798e56ef89ffdae9dd980dc8d41738f1
Why this rating
Why this rating
Composite 37 · Do not cite
- Coherencemeasuredweight 25.0
5 full-provenance Coherent Markets Engine signals linked to this condition; 30 price-observation checkpoints recorded.
30+9.4 - Executabilityheuristicweight 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.
15+3.8 - Resolution reliabilityheuristicweight 20.0
Resolution source and rule text are present but not independently reviewed.
70+17.5 - Participant qualitypendingweight 20.0
Participant-quality inputs exist but do not meet coverage floors.
n/ano contrib - Integrity risk screenheuristicweight 10.0
Top account flow share is 100%.
0no contrib - Audit completenessmeasuredweight 5.0
3 linked artifacts; 0 missing hashes; 0 stale/failing sources.
100+6.3
Will Ethereum reach $10,000 by December 31, 2026?
Bottom line
Do not cite. Use only as a review target. Current-card issues must clear before this price is used as evidence.
On this market the binding constraint is Integrity risk screen (25/100): Some pillars on this card are still gathering evidence.
This 0–100 score grades the market’s quality and citability, not its odds; a market can trade at any probability and still score low.
Trust score /100
48
interval 23-54
Evidence
4 measured
1 heuristic · 1 pending
Freshness
current
<1h lag
Current card issue: Some pillars on this card are still gathering evidence.
Executive answer
Do not cite: treat this as a market-diligence snapshot, not a price forecast.
Technical score waterfall +
Math guardrails
Quality
48
interval 23-54
Confidence
74
medium
Driver
rating capped by quality interval low
Sensitivity
fragile under sensitivity
Participant substrate
Pillar
pending
Scored flow
100%
1/1 accounts
Unknown flow
0%
evidence confidence input
100% of wallet/side pairs appear repeatedly
Macro caveat
crypto threshold is treated as macro-liquidity context, not perps coverage
Evidence: 4 measured · 1 heuristic · 1 pending · 0 blocked
audit 44fa78aae472eff5e56c9e216eff1ba9bedebd1f36eb74ed2893d91a6fc386c9
Why this rating
Why this rating
Composite 48 · Do not cite
- Coherencemeasuredweight 25.0
5 full-provenance Coherent Markets Engine signals linked to this condition; 30 price-observation checkpoints recorded.
30+9.4 - 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.
45+11.3 - Resolution reliabilityheuristicweight 20.0
Resolution source and rule text are present but not independently reviewed.
70+17.5 - Participant qualitypendingweight 20.0
Participant-quality inputs exist but do not meet coverage floors.
n/ano contrib - Integrity risk screenmeasuredweight 10.0
Heavy concentration / wash-pattern signals; treat with caution.
25+3.1 - Audit completenessmeasuredweight 5.0
5 linked artifacts; 0 missing hashes; 0 stale/failing sources.
100+6.3
Starmer out by June 30, 2026?
Bottom line
Do not cite. Use only as a review target. Current-card issues must clear before this price is used as evidence.
On this market the binding constraint is Coherence (30/100): Not enough pillars on this card are measured yet.
This 0–100 score grades the market’s quality and citability, not its odds; a market can trade at any probability and still score low.
Trust score /100
54
interval 18-64
Evidence
2 measured
2 heuristic · 2 pending
Freshness
current
<1h lag
Current card issue: Not enough pillars on this card are measured yet.
Executive answer
Do not cite: treat this as a market-diligence snapshot, not a price forecast.
Technical score waterfall +
Math guardrails
Quality
54
interval 18-64
Confidence
43
low
Driver
participant quality pending high unknown flow
Sensitivity
fragile under sensitivity
Participant substrate
Pillar
pending
Scored flow
0%
0/1 accounts
Unknown flow
100%
verdict capped
artifact_hashes_present
Evidence: 2 measured · 2 heuristic · 2 pending · 0 blocked
audit feb202ea3c1533b92350424814ea7f3982107ac623428756033ade068d86bc89
Why this rating
Why this rating
Composite 54 · Do not cite
- Coherencemeasuredweight 25.0
2 full-provenance Coherent Markets Engine signals linked to this condition; 12 price-observation checkpoints recorded.
30+10.7 - Executabilityheuristicweight 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.
45+12.9 - Resolution reliabilityheuristicweight 20.0
Resolution source and rule text are present but not independently reviewed.
70+20.0 - Participant qualitypendingweight 20.0
Participant-quality inputs exist but do not meet coverage floors.
n/ano contrib - Integrity risk screenpendingweight 10.0
Mild concentration or coordination signals; review before citing.
75no contrib - Audit completenessmeasuredweight 5.0
3 linked artifacts; 0 missing hashes; 0 stale/failing sources.
100+7.1
Will Trump pardon Sam Bankman-Fried before 2027?
Bottom line
Do not cite. Use only as a review target. Current-card issues must clear before this price is used as evidence.
On this market the binding constraint is Coherence (30/100): Not enough pillars on this card are measured yet.
This 0–100 score grades the market’s quality and citability, not its odds; a market can trade at any probability and still score low.
Trust score /100
50
interval 12-60
Evidence
2 measured
2 heuristic · 2 pending
Freshness
current
<1h lag
Current card issue: Not enough pillars on this card are measured yet.
Executive answer
Do not cite: treat this as a market-diligence snapshot, not a price forecast.
Technical score waterfall +
Math guardrails
Quality
50
interval 12-60
Confidence
38
low
Driver
measured pillar artifact incomplete
Sensitivity
fragile under sensitivity
Participant substrate
Pillar
pending
Scored flow
Unknown
sample unknown
Unknown flow
Unknown
evidence confidence input
artifact_hash_missing
Evidence: 2 measured · 2 heuristic · 2 pending · 0 blocked
audit 7d8ba813110cbbba9a9ef9e2eee2b90a57028962cf739b182e614ae125145713
Why this rating
Why this rating
Composite 50 · Do not cite
- Coherencemeasuredweight 25.0
5 full-provenance Coherent Markets Engine signals linked to this condition; 30 price-observation checkpoints recorded.
30+10.7 - Executabilityheuristicweight 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.
45+12.9 - Resolution reliabilityheuristicweight 20.0
Resolution source and rule text are present but not independently reviewed.
70+20.0 - Participant qualitypendingweight 20.0
No participant-quality rollup materialized yet.
n/ano contrib - Integrity risk screenpendingweight 10.0
No participant concentration rollup materialized yet.
n/ano contrib - Audit completenessmeasuredweight 5.0
3 linked artifacts; 1 missing hashes; 0 stale/failing sources.
85+6.1
Will Madison Cawthorn be the Republican nominee for FL-19?
Bottom line
Do not cite. Use only as a review target. Current-card issues must clear before this price is used as evidence.
On this market the binding constraint is Coherence (30/100): Not enough pillars on this card are measured yet.
This 0–100 score grades the market’s quality and citability, not its odds; a market can trade at any probability and still score low.
Trust score /100
41
interval 0-51
Evidence
2 measured
2 heuristic · 2 pending
Freshness
current
<1h lag
Current card issue: Not enough pillars on this card are measured yet.
Executive answer
Do not cite: treat this as a market-diligence snapshot, not a price forecast.
Technical score waterfall +
Math guardrails
Quality
41
interval 0-51
Confidence
38
low
Driver
measured pillar artifact incomplete
Sensitivity
fragile under sensitivity
Participant substrate
Pillar
pending
Scored flow
Unknown
sample unknown
Unknown flow
Unknown
evidence confidence input
artifact_hash_missing
Evidence: 2 measured · 2 heuristic · 2 pending · 0 blocked
audit 606499a47ce5baa4694ccf2191c57a20ba230bfd2739ff93ad032fc3756c3de4
Why this rating
Why this rating
Composite 41 · Do not cite
- Coherencemeasuredweight 25.0
2 full-provenance Coherent Markets Engine signals linked to this condition; 12 price-observation checkpoints recorded.
30+10.7 - Executabilityheuristicweight 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.
15+4.3 - Resolution reliabilityheuristicweight 20.0
Resolution source and rule text are present but not independently reviewed.
70+20.0 - Participant qualitypendingweight 20.0
No participant-quality rollup materialized yet.
n/ano contrib - Integrity risk screenpendingweight 10.0
No participant concentration rollup materialized yet.
n/ano contrib - Audit completenessmeasuredweight 5.0
3 linked artifacts; 1 missing hashes; 0 stale/failing sources.
85+6.1
Will Donald Trump visit the United Kingdom in 2026?
Bottom line
Do not cite. Use only as a review target. Current-card issues must clear before this price is used as evidence.
On this market the binding constraint is Coherence (30/100): Not enough pillars on this card are measured yet.
This 0–100 score grades the market’s quality and citability, not its odds; a market can trade at any probability and still score low.
Trust score /100
41
interval 0-51
Evidence
2 measured
2 heuristic · 2 pending
Freshness
current
<1h lag
Current card issue: Not enough pillars on this card are measured yet.
Executive answer
Do not cite: treat this as a market-diligence snapshot, not a price forecast.
Technical score waterfall +
Math guardrails
Quality
41
interval 0-51
Confidence
38
low
Driver
measured pillar artifact incomplete
Sensitivity
fragile under sensitivity
Participant substrate
Pillar
pending
Scored flow
Unknown
sample unknown
Unknown flow
Unknown
evidence confidence input
artifact_hash_missing
Evidence: 2 measured · 2 heuristic · 2 pending · 0 blocked
audit ebeb26f550fc3a53c546f0635879863abd5c951a7a2bc87df3ed0f7186584fe7
Why this rating
Why this rating
Composite 41 · Do not cite
- Coherencemeasuredweight 25.0
5 full-provenance Coherent Markets Engine signals linked to this condition; 30 price-observation checkpoints recorded.
30+10.7 - Executabilityheuristicweight 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.
15+4.3 - Resolution reliabilityheuristicweight 20.0
Resolution source and rule text are present but not independently reviewed.
70+20.0 - Participant qualitypendingweight 20.0
No participant-quality rollup materialized yet.
n/ano contrib - Integrity risk screenpendingweight 10.0
No participant concentration rollup materialized yet.
n/ano contrib - Audit completenessmeasuredweight 5.0
3 linked artifacts; 1 missing hashes; 0 stale/failing sources.
85+6.1
Research preview status
What this preview can and cannot tell you yet.
The canary model should make a market legible to an advisor, journalist, venue operator, or institutional risk team: what supports the rating, what is still weak, and what has to resolve before Convexly can make stronger claims.
Current card issues
These are live card-health issues, not long-term validation requirements.
Before a stable rating
These are evidence requirements for public promotion. They can remain open while the internal canary batch is healthy.
Candidate cards
6
latest audit run
Measured inputs
39%
14/36 pillar inputs
Clean source
6/6
no stale snapshot or dropped events
Sensitivity-stable verdicts
1/6
sensitivity-stable cards
Pending
10
inputs still being collected
Blocked rights
0
data unavailable by policy
Pillar measurement
Participant quality
0/6 cards measured
Public wallet flow is joined into Edge Score cohorts when sample floors are met. The remaining work is coverage breadth, not inventing the pillar.
View wallet cohorts
Order book
Liquidity and depth
1/6 cards measured
Canary cards now distinguish shallow snapshots from measurable depth, so weak markets are downgraded instead of hidden behind a single score.
Open canary proof
Integrity
Integrity-risk screen
1/6 cards measured
Flow concentration and pattern screens are treated as evidence flags. They are not proof of intent, and they should travel with every rating.
Read method
Freshness
Source-health gate
6/6 cards clean
A card should not graduate while its source snapshot is stale or event drops are present. Freshness is part of the rating boundary.
Inspect source health
Robustness
Sensitivity check
1/6 verdicts stable
The score must survive leave-one-pillar-out and weight-perturbation checks before the verdict is safe to show as durable.
Review guardrails
Validation
Resolved-outcome ledger
0/6 cards unblocked
This is the claim-upgrade gate. Market Trust stays experimental until resolved cohorts show whether high-trust cards were actually more useful.
Track outcomes
Method
Formula freeze
0/6 cards unblocked
The formula must be frozen before validation so the backtest cannot silently move the target after seeing outcomes.
View preregs
Production readiness
What we're still proving before this is a stable rating.
Market Trust is usable as a preview diligence packet, not a stable public rating contract. The goal is a packet a buyer can cite because the verdict, caveat, source status, participant evidence, integrity screen, and validation limits are all visible together.
Current contract
Status: canary_preview. Founder approval is required before this moves from preview to a stable public rating.
Resolved outcome ledger
BlockedConvexly cannot claim Market Trust tiers predict cleaner or more useful markets until resolved card-time rows exist.
Now: The preview cards carry validation placeholders and promotion blockers; resolved-outcome evidence is still the hard gate.
Next: Write resolved card-time rows, show the denominator, and publish positive and negative result handling.
Formula freeze
BlockedA buyer should know the score was frozen before validation, not tuned after outcomes were visible.
Now: The promotion contract exists, but the public formula and thresholds are not founder-approved as frozen.
Next: Freeze weights, thresholds, caps, and sensitivity rules in code and link the receipt before any stable-rating language.
Source freshness
In progressA current-card verdict must degrade when Polymarket or Kalshi inputs are stale, failing, or dropping events.
Now: Candidate cards already expose source health and freshness gates; sustained clean operation is still required.
Next: Maintain the clean-source window required by the promotion contract and keep card language downgraded during stale windows.
Participant-quality coverage
In progressThe rating should know whether meaningful market flow came from scored public participants or mostly unknown flow.
Now: Participant evidence is joined where public wallet-flow floors are met; coverage is not broad enough for a stable public rating.
Next: Raise scored-notional coverage, keep unknown-flow caveats visible, and separate aggregate-only venue limits.
Integrity-risk screen
In progressIntegrity language must stay a risk screen until reviewed positive and negative cohorts prove detector quality.
Now: The preview screen exposes concentration and pattern flags without turning them into intent claims.
Next: Label review cohorts, measure false positives and false negatives, then publish the screen limits.
Outcome calibration
BlockedThe four verdicts need observed calibration before Convexly can say one tier is empirically safer than another.
Now: The verdict framework is visible, but the resolved cohort needed for calibrated tier language is not mature.
Next: Compare use, use-with-caveats, discount, and do-not-cite cohorts against clean resolution and reviewer labels.
Stable public snapshot
The stable public snapshot remains available while the candidate model earns production history. Search is intentionally simple: market slug, question, category, or condition ID.
Will Albania advance through the second Eurovision Semi-Final?
This market has enough quality concerns that the raw probability should be discounted unless corroborated by other evidence.
Evidence: 3 measured · 3 heuristic · 1 pending
v0.1 score
49
Will Solstice launch a token by June 30 2026?
This market has enough quality concerns that the raw probability should be discounted unless corroborated by other evidence.
Evidence: 3 measured · 3 heuristic · 1 pending
v0.1 score
47
Will Croatia advance through the first Eurovision Semi-Final?
This market has enough quality concerns that the raw probability should be discounted unless corroborated by other evidence.
Evidence: 3 measured · 3 heuristic · 1 pending
v0.1 score
46