SNAPSHOT STUDY · POLYMARKET RANK 3 IN SELECTED LIST
Bitcoin price thresholds
Touches $90,000 during September versus above $86,499.99 on September 25 at 5 p.m. ET
Books captured 2026-09-21T22:39:43.131Z. Listing metadata captured 2026-09-21T22:36:18.333Z. Provider batch started 2026-09-21T22:41:26.716Z. This page does not refresh automatically.
TL;DR
These are different questions, despite similar-looking prices. The price gap cannot support a cross-platform value or arbitrage conclusion. Useful for studying path dependence, source differences, and rapidly changing depth.
Useful option for learning: Best for practicing rejection of a false match. A useful analytical result here is ‘not comparable,’ not a preferred bet.
Bid / hypothetical entry: selected Polymarket outcome bid 49.80¢, ask 49.90¢. A bid is buying interest; an ask is an offered entry price. Neither is guaranteed to remain available.
100-share illustration: 50.90 points of total cost with the assumed 1¢/share fee; 49.10 net upside on a full win; 50.90 maximum loss in the zero-payout state. At the midpoint benchmark, expected net is -1.05 points.
What exactly resolves?
Polymarket uses Binance candle highs and excludes other exchanges. Kalshi supplies its own reference-price rule and contract definition. Inspect the full source conditions in the raw snapshot and official contract before interpreting a comparison.
The Polymarket month ends September 30 at 11:59 p.m. ET; the selected Kalshi observation is September 25 at 5 p.m. ET. Neither is interchangeable with a daily closing price.
Are the two platforms asking the same question?
Polymarket asks whether a Binance BTC/USDT one-minute candle HIGH reaches $90,000 during September. Kalshi’s selected contract tests its specified Bitcoin reference price at a particular Friday observation. Threshold, observation window, and price source differ. A price can touch a threshold and later fall below it.
Is there room at the quoted price?
Depth below is measured from the captured book within 2¢ of each side’s best ask. The 100- and 1,000-share examples consume successive ask levels. These are snapshots of visible entry liquidity, not reservations, total market capacity, or exit guarantees. Kalshi asks are derived as 1 minus the opposing bid with its available quantity.
| Venue / outcome | Bid / ask | Spread | At best ask | Within +2¢ | 100-share avg | 1,000-share avg |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Polymarket / Yes | 49.80¢ / 49.90¢ | 0.10¢ | 1,180 shares | 6,024 shares 3,056.31 quote units | 49.90¢ | 49.90¢ |
| Polymarket / No | 50.10¢ / 50.20¢ | 0.10¢ | 2,017 shares | 26,377 shares 13,641.86 quote units | 50.20¢ | 50.20¢ |
| Kalshi / YES | 49.00¢ / 51.00¢ | 2.00¢ | 4,205 shares | 13,765 shares 7,141.35 quote units | 51.00¢ | 51.00¢ |
| Kalshi / NO | 49.00¢ / 51.00¢ | 2.00¢ | 5,729 shares | 17,013 shares 8,874.70 quote units | 51.00¢ | 51.00¢ |
Reported 24h activity: Polymarket parent event 1,621,642 USD; selected contract 177,235 USD. Kalshi parent event 763,636 contracts; selected contract 25,612 contracts. These units are not interchangeable.
Both sides: upside is not the same as likelihood
One hypothetical share at each captured ask, before fees. The price is not a measured win probability. A winning share pays one unit; a losing share pays zero. Football ties and exceptional settlement can pay other amounts.
| Venue / outcome | Entry cost | Net if full win | Loss if zero payout | Return if full win |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Polymarket / Yes | 49.90¢ | 50.10¢ | 49.90¢ | 100.40% |
| Polymarket / No | 50.20¢ | 49.80¢ | 50.20¢ | 99.20% |
| Kalshi / YES | 51.00¢ | 49.00¢ | 51.00¢ | 96.08% |
| Kalshi / NO | 51.00¢ | 49.00¢ | 51.00¢ | 96.08% |
Return if win is conditional net gain ÷ entry cost. It is not expected return, annualized return, or a recommendation. Fees lower the gain and increase the amount at risk.
Evidence and forecasting thesis
The captured contract midpoint is the initial market benchmark. EODHD daily data is context only; no calibrated barrier-hitting probability was fitted. The ±5-point scenarios are deliberately hypothetical.
- Distance to each threshold and time remaining; hitting a barrier differs from finishing above it.
- Volatility and jumps: a symmetric day-to-day model can understate rare large moves.
- Venue basis, time zones, and exact sampling windows. A broad crypto headline does not establish a qualifying candle.
What would invalidate the assessment: A qualifying historical candle may settle the touch question immediately. Verify that it has not already occurred before applying any forward-looking probability model.
Risk profile: A high-priced NO outcome can offer little remaining upside while a sudden rally can lose most or all of the entry cost. Frequent price changes can invalidate both a quote and its depth quickly.
Binance BTC/USDT — Named Polymarket resolution series; use final one-minute highs, not a different exchange’s quote. These are verification sources, not evidence that the future outcome has occurred.
Kalshi Bitcoin contract — Defines the Kalshi observation and reference-price method. These are verification sources, not evidence that the future outcome has occurred.
Probability model and payoff sensitivity
The starting benchmark is the captured Polymarket bid–ask midpoint, 49.85%. No validated independent model justifies changing it. Lower and higher scenarios move this assumption by five percentage points; they are not confidence bounds or recommendations. Figures use 100 shares at the best ask plus an illustrative 1¢ per share total fee allowance. Larger entries require the depth simulation.
| Scenario | Assumed probability | Expected net points | Full binary Kelly |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower assumption | 44.85% | -6.05 | 0.00% |
| Market benchmark | 49.85% | -1.05 | 0.00% |
| Higher assumption | 54.85% | 3.95 | 8.04% |
Formula: expected net = N × [p(win) + 0.5 × p(tie) − entry − fee]. The binary table assumes p(tie)=0. Break-even under that assumption is 50.90%. A better-looking result after increasing p proves only that the calculation responds to p.
High price, small upside: an actual example
Will Bitcoin reach $100,000 in September? — buying the NO outcome was quoted at 95.70¢ when captured 2026-09-21T22:50:42.870Z.
For one share before fees: cost 95.70¢, maximum remaining net upside 4.30¢, maximum loss 95.70¢. One full loss consumes the gross gains of roughly 22.3 equally priced winning shares. This is payoff arithmetic, not an estimated loss frequency.
Only 23.26 shares were displayed at that best ask. A high event-volume total does not mean unlimited participation at this price. The deadline, named Binance price source, and sudden-rally risk still matter. No independent evidence here establishes that this is low risk.
This is a supplementary Bitcoin contract, separate from the $90,000 primary study. A 1¢ per-share illustrative fee would reduce the remaining upside to 3.30¢. Verify actual fees separately. Source market API.
Change the assumptions
This paper simulator sweeps the captured Polymarket ask ladder. It uses no live quotes and places no orders. The default 1¢ fee per share is an illustrative total cost allowance, not a verified platform fee. Add slippage through the captured ladder; no exit fee or future price is known.
- Modeled average entry
- 49.9¢
- Total fictional cost
- 50.9
- Net if win
- 49.1
- Net if lose
- -50.9
- Expected net result
- -1.05
- Break-even win probability
- 50.9%
- Full Kelly (theoretical)
- 0%
Kelly assumes a binary payout and that your probability and cost estimates are correct; this is not an allocation recommendation. A positive result follows from the assumptions; it does not validate them.
Every tool’s contribution
Observed inputs, calculated outputs, actual provider responses, and tools that cannot support this study are identified separately. All sixteen learning tools are accounted for.
Financial Evidence: EODHD + Jev Executed; context only
- Input
- EODHD symbol BTC-USD.CC; exact question and rules sent for article classification.
- Output
- 31 daily records; latest 2026-09-21: 81,369.3281 in quoted instrument units. Article labels: unrelated 2, insufficient 3.
- How it affects this assessment
- Daily prices and proxies do not resolve a sports result, election, policy decision, or intraminute barrier. Same-day bars may be incomplete. Article confidence concerns the classification, never the event’s chance.
AI Market Analyzer Unavailable for this run
- Input
- Title, rule text, metadata price 50.35%, and identical assumed probability; no assumed advantage.
- Output
- HTTP 429: daily free-use limit reached; no result generated.
- How it affects this assessment
- Do not turn an AI-written explanation into a second independent forecast. Access limits were respected; no quota or entitlement bypass was attempted.
Drift Radar Executed; rejected for outcome modeling
- Input
- Polymarket condition 0x69b547a99088602456fbce087cbc5a503c8b902b3ba58e8873aa771b0bee46a5; model google/timesfm-2.5-200m-pytorch.
- Output
- Spot 49.85% → terminal median 50.37%; p10 48.51%, p90 52.84%; quality low_data; stale cache no.
- How it affects this assessment
- These are contract-price projections, not event probabilities. All captured forecasts were flagged low_data; very narrow bands do not establish certainty. They receive no probability-model weight.
Research Workspace Executed; excluded from probability
- Input
- Research API topic: Will Bitcoin reach $90,000 in September?.
- Output
- HTTP 200; signal score 85/100; returned confidence High.
- How it affects this assessment
- The current endpoint does not return inspectable citations for its numeric signal. These are actual returned labels, not measured probabilities or verified news statistics. They receive no numerical weight in this assessment.
Market Browser Observed
- Input
- Selected contract 4052417; outcome Yes.
- Output
- Order-book bid 49.80¢, ask 49.90¢, midpoint 49.85%. The separate Gamma metadata ask was 50.40¢.
- How it affects this assessment
- Use the book snapshot for price and size math. The midpoint is a market benchmark, not an independent forecast. Metadata and books were fetched at different times.
Daily Market Desk Assessed
- Input
- The selected question, its rules, quote timestamps, and provider status.
- Output
- Study priority: verify the rules first; inspect 6,024 displayed shares within 2¢ of the selected Polymarket ask; then review the model-quality flags.
- How it affects this assessment
- This is a completed research checklist. High activity changes what is interesting to observe, not what is true.
Cross-Platform Comparison Observed; equivalence unproven
- Input
- Specific first-outcome/YES contracts on both venues.
- Output
- Midpoints: Polymarket 49.85%; Kalshi 50.00%. Difference: -0.15 percentage points.
- How it affects this assessment
- Do not interpret this as a forecast advantage. See the detailed rule comparison; Bitcoin is explicitly a different threshold and time window.
Dual Market View Match reviewed
- Input
- Same topic, explicit outcome mapping, and both sets of rules.
- Output
- Jev rule check: different; classification confidence 96.00%.
- How it affects this assessment
- Semantic similarity alone does not verify a hedge. The editorial comparison is the operative explanation; Jev is a separate, fallible check.
Triple Market View Not established
- Input
- Polymarket and Kalshi selected contracts.
- Output
- No matching Metaculus question was verified for this study. No third estimate was inserted or averaged.
- How it affects this assessment
- Two venues do not become three independent forecasts by adding an AI score. The third-view tool remains available for a separately verified match.
Vig & Implied Probability Calculator Calculated
- Input
- Polymarket first-outcome ask 49.90¢ and opposite-outcome ask 50.20¢.
- Output
- Sum 100.10¢; overround 0.10 percentage points. Normalized first-outcome quote 49.85%.
- How it affects this assessment
- This describes the two asks, not the platform fee or an objective probability. Costs must be modeled separately.
Arbitrage Scanner Arithmetic only; not certified
- Input
- Opposite-side asks across the two venues, before fees and without guaranteeing simultaneous fills.
- Output
- Poly first outcome + Kalshi NO: 100.90¢. Kalshi YES + Poly opposite: 101.20¢.
- How it affects this assessment
- One unit of combined payout is not guaranteed when rules differ. A sum below 100¢ is not sufficient evidence of arbitrage. Unlike the standalone two-YES calculator, these sums use actual opposite-side books.
Expected Value Calculator Calculated from assumptions
- Input
- 100 hypothetical shares, entry 49.90¢, benchmark p=49.85%, assumed fee 1¢/share.
- Output
- Cost 50.90 points; expected net -1.05; if win 49.10; if lose -50.90. Break-even p=50.90%.
- How it affects this assessment
- EV = shares × (assumed win probability − entry − assumed fee). The standalone calculator omits this fee allowance; its equivalent stake is 100 × entry. Football values here condition on a decisive result.
Kelly Criterion Calculator Calculated; hypothetical only
- Input
- Binary formula max(0, (p − entry)/(1 − entry)); p=49.85%.
- Output
- Gross full Kelly 0.00%; with the illustrative fee 0.00%. Half Kelly 0.00%.
- How it affects this assessment
- The market midpoint is no independent probability advantage. A positive output after manually increasing p would follow from that assumption, not establish an allocation recommendation.
Parlay Builder Dependence sensitivity
- Input
- This event at the benchmark 49.85% plus a purely illustrative second event at 50%.
- Output
- Independence product 24.93%; mathematically possible joint range 0.00%–49.85% without an independence assumption.
- How it affects this assessment
- No second real-world forecast is asserted. Shared drivers can invalidate multiplication. The midterms contract is already a joint event: do not multiply it by another chamber probability.
Historical Calibration Not yet measurable
- Input
- Prospective paper forecast p=49.85%; outcome unresolved at capture.
- Output
- If binary YES, Brier contribution 0.2515; if NO, 0.2485. No realized score is assigned.
- How it affects this assessment
- These are prospective score calculations, not evidence of accuracy. The existing calibration chart includes seed data and is not a backtest of this forecast.
Portfolio Tracker Paper ledger only
- Input
- A hypothetical 100-share entry using the captured ask ladder.
- Output
- Modeled entry value 49.90 points at average 49.90¢; plus a 1-point illustrative entry-fee allowance. No real position exists.
- How it affects this assessment
- A complete ledger also needs side, timestamp, rules, fee assumption, later mark, and outcome. Do not sum related studies as though their risks were independent.
Actual provider outputs: inspect before trusting
Jev returned different for the rule comparison, with classification confidence 96.00% using jev-1.13.0. This is not the event’s probability. The request rubric and full distribution are in the evidence download.
Drift forecast window: 2026-09-21T23:41:41.640764Z to 2026-10-01T04:41:41.640764Z. Quality flag: low_data. Rejected for probability modeling. Near-zero variation in a projected band is not proof of low risk.
BTC-USD.CC daily closes and dated articles are contextual inputs. They cannot establish Binance BTC/USDT intraminute highs or Kalshi’s specified observation.
EODHD returned 31 daily records for BTC-USD.CC. Latest record: 2026-09-21, close 81,369.3281 in quoted instrument units. Retrieval: 2026-09-21T22:41:26.885Z. Same-day values may not be final. No election, policy, or touch-threshold probability was derived from them.
- XRP and NEAR Lead Altcoin Squeeze as Crypto Short Sellers Lose $666 Million in 24 Hours
2026-09-21T15:34:00.000Z · unrelated · classification confidence 51.00%
- Bitcoin Price Briefly Rockets to $155,000 in Bitfinex Market Glitch
2026-09-21T11:08:00.000Z · insufficient · classification confidence 33.00%
- Bitcoin Reclaims Key Weekly Level for First Time in 45 Weeks
2026-09-21T05:29:00.000Z · insufficient · classification confidence 41.00%
- $930,040,000 in Bitcoin and Crypto Liquidated As BTC Price Crosses $86,000
2026-09-21T00:00:00.000Z · insufficient · classification confidence 73.00%
- Michael Saylor’s Strategy Restarts Bitcoin Purchases, Adding $76,000,000 Worth of BTC
2026-09-21T00:00:00.000Z · unrelated · classification confidence 54.00%
Raw Research and Analyzer responses — unverified, excluded from probability
Returned narratives and numeric labels may contain unsupported claims. HTTP 429 means no result was generated. These records document tool behavior, not verified news or advice.
{
"research": {
"status": 200,
"body": {
"topic": "Will Bitcoin reach $90,000 in September?",
"keywords": [
{
"term": "Bitcoin price",
"score": 95,
"trend": "rising"
},
{
"term": "ETF inflows",
"score": 80,
"trend": "rising"
},
{
"term": "short squeeze",
"score": 75,
"trend": "rising"
},
{
"term": "technical analysis",
"score": 68,
"trend": "stable"
},
{
"term": "spot demand",
"score": 60,
"trend": "rising"
},
{
"term": "Federal Reserve",
"score": 45,
"trend": "stable"
},
{
"term": "Clarity Act",
"score": 35,
"trend": "declining"
},
{
"term": "USDT dominance",
"score": 25,
"trend": "stable"
}
],
"coverageIndex": 88,
"coverageTrend": "accelerating",
"coverageChangePct": 45,
"sentimentScore": 70,
"sentimentTrend": "improving",
"signalScore": 85,
"signalDirection": "bullish",
"interpretation": "Recent news indicates a strong bullish sentiment for Bitcoin, with several analysts targeting $90,000 in September. The price has broken above key resistance levels, driven by renewed spot demand, significant ETF inflows, and a short squeeze. While some caution remains regarding potential pullbacks, the overall market structure suggests a continued upward trend.",
"leadingIndicators": [
"Sustained spot and ETF demand for Bitcoin",
"Bitcoin holding above $85,000 and clearing $87,000 resistance",
"Positive Coinbase premium and firmer USDT pricing"
],
"watchNext": [
"ETF flows and U.S. Treasury yields",
"Federal Reserve official speeches (September 22 and 24)",
"Bitcoin maintaining support above $83,700 and breaking $87,000"
],
"confidence": "High",
"dataWindow": "7 days"
}
},
"analyzer": {
"status": 429,
"body": {
"error": "You've used your free AI analysis for today. Upgrade to Premium for unlimited access.",
"usage": {
"feature": "ai_analyzer",
"used": 1,
"limit": 1,
"remaining": 0,
"resetAt": "2026-09-22T00:00:00.000Z",
"isPremium": false,
"enforced": true
},
"isPremium": false,
"requestId": "be5f2a73-b6dd-4154-87ef-e8dedb2c1446"
}
}
}Costs, participation mechanics, and limits
- Entering: choosing a side, size, and price is different from receiving a fill. A limit can remain unfilled; crossing available quotes can consume multiple levels. These pages place no orders.
- Exiting: today’s entry depth says nothing certain about future bids. Early exit introduces a future-price assumption and may add fees. A marked gain is not a realized payout.
- Fees: all five captured Polymarket markets report fees enabled; the legacy fee endpoint returns base_fee 1000. This study does not interpret that as a flat 10% charge. Use the current market-specific schedule and rounding. Kalshi’s series fee type is quadratic; overrides and execution type can matter.
- Time and settlement: distinguish the event time, order close, resolution, dispute period, and withdrawal availability. Holding time and currency/funding costs are excluded from the scenario.
- Eligibility and access: platform and regional rules apply. Educational access to these pages does not establish eligibility to transact on either venue.
- Concentration: related topics may move together. The five studies are a learning set, not a diversified portfolio or an allocation proposal.
Repeat the paper exercise
Write the exact condition, timestamp, selected outcome, initial probability, evidence, and your reason for any change. Record the modeled entry and assumed costs. After official resolution, revisit the original forecast; do not backfill a winning prediction.
Existing EV/Kelly handoffs exclude the illustrative fee. They use the captured best ask and hypothetical inputs; the live tool may display different data if refreshed.