Loading
Daily market read
Certainty reflects how much of this market we measured, not how good the market is.
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.
The diligence packet carries the memo language, audit chain, and the Markdown, PDF, and JSON exports for this market.
Open the diligence packetWhy this rating
Composite 60 · Do not cite
Measurement certainty
Low
1 measured · 3 modeled · 2 not assessed
Certainty reflects how much of this market we measured, not how good the market is.
No full-provenance CME signal is linked to this condition in the current ledger window; absence of a signal is not proof of coherence.
A separate preview read: this market's book quality relative to peers at the same time-to-close and price range. It does not feed the Market Trust rating above.
Peer group: markets 7-30 days to scheduled close, priced within 10c of a boundary. As of 2026-08-24 (UTC).
Quoted spread is tighter than ~88% of horizon-matched peers.
Order-book depth is deeper than ~88% of horizon-matched peers.
Peer cell: 173 markets, 374 market-day observations, trailing 28 days (2026-07-27 to 2026-08-23).
Resolution rules
Rules as stated by Polymarket, reproduced verbatim. Convexly has not independently reviewed them and does not endorse them; the rating's resolution-reliability pillar treats rule text as present but not independently reviewed.
Experimental rating caveat
Market Trust Cards are experimental market-quality diagnostics, not compliance certifications or validated credit ratings.
What travels with this read
Market Trust is a canary preview: verdict cutpoints are operator-set, and each read is a dated, descriptive diagnostic of market quality, not a prediction of the outcome and not a claim about what the probability should be. A prospective calibration test is filed and matures on resolved outcomes.
Sign in to see recent trades our collectors observed here: side, size, price, and time for every recorded fill.
Create a free accountNone of the wallets in Convexly's provably-complete set has been observed trading this market. That is a statement about this set's observed footprint, not about who trades here.
Check any Polymarket wallet →Quote it verbatim. The number and how the set was chosen travel together; the method is frozen and the per-wallet table is public.
Convexly rates this polymarket market "US x Iran diplomatic meeting by August 31, 2026?" as Do not cite, as of 2026-08-24 (UTC).
Per Convexly Market Trust, the polymarket market "US x Iran diplomatic meeting by August 31, 2026?" is rated Do not cite as of 2026-08-24T05:30:33.285Z (UTC). The rating describes whether the quoted market price was a clean enough data object to cite at that timestamp. This citation is market diligence, not investment advice, not a trading instruction, not a forecast, and not proof that the market probability is correct. Daily read: https://www.convexly.app/markets/us-x-iran-diplomatic-meeting-by-august-31-2026-2
Canonical URL: https://www.convexly.app/markets/us-x-iran-diplomatic-meeting-by-august-31-2026-2
Boundary of this page
This daily read 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 this market price had enough substrate to cite, monitor, discount, or ignore at the as-of timestamp, with receipts attached in the diligence packet.
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 source and rule text are present but not independently reviewed.
Participant flow inputs exist but do not meet identity-coverage floors; descriptive only.
One or more screen indicators flagged at a low level. A reason to look, not a finding about anyone.
3 linked artifacts; 0 missing hashes; 0 stale/failing sources.
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.
On June 22, the first round of U.S.-Iran diplomatic talks in Switzerland concluded, with mediators reporting progress toward a roadmap for a final deal and follow-on technical talks expected to continue.(see: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/6/22/us-iran-agree-on-roadmap-towards-final-deal-in-switzerland-talks). This market will resolve to “Yes” if the next formal senior-level round of peace talks between representatives of the United States and Iran begins by the listed date, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to “No.” A qualifying round must be a deliberate in-person diplomatic meeting or negotiating round concerning US-Iran relations, involving senior representatives of both the United States and Iran who are acting in an official capacity and are authorized to conduct or materially direct diplomacy on behalf of their governments. Indirect in-person diplomacy through designated mediators, facilitators, or interlocutors will qualify, provided senior representatives of both the United States and Iran are participating in the same formal diplomatic process with the knowledge and authorization of their respective governments. The representatives need not be in the same room at the same time. Follow-on technical talks from the June 22 Switzerland round will not qualify by themselves. Technical, staff-level, working-group, implementation, monitoring, preparatory, or deconfliction meetings will not qualify unless they occur as part of a new formally convened senior-level U.S.-Iran peace-talks round. Brief greetings, chance encounters, photo opportunities, ceremonial appearances, or talks not deliberately aimed at diplomacy or negotiation will not count. The meeting must be in-person (including indirect in-person meetings) and must be publicly acknowledged by either government or reported by a consensus of credible media. Remote meetings, phone calls, or other meetings where the relevant parties are not present will not count. The resolution sources for this market will be official information from the governments of the United States and Iran, and a consensus of credible reporting.
Convexly is independent and is not affiliated with or endorsed by Polymarket or Manifold. Wallet and market data are derived from publicly available venue sources.
© Convexly 2026