Mispricing Scanner
A Bayesian engine scans prediction markets daily for mispricings. Agent A finds the same event on the other platform (LLM-validated) and compares the price — when a validated twin exists. Agent B is Claude NLP estimating probability from the question. When the engine diverges from the market by 5pp+, the contract is flagged with Kelly sizing; 3–5pp near-misses go to a free watchlist band.
Runs every morning; results post by ~10 AM ET. How it works →
Quick Answer
the Mispricing Scanner publishes a Kalshi contract only when the same event is found on the other platform and a resolution-criteria check confirms the two prices are comparable. That check has not cleared across the full scan history, so the board is currently empty — the standalone model estimate that used to fill it did not beat the market price when reviewed against settled results, and is no longer graded or published. The tool is being rebuilt for the 2026 midterms as a markets-versus-pundits tracker.
If you're asking whether Kalshi/Polymarket mispricing flags actually pay out: the scanner flags markets where its Bayesian engine diverges from the platform price by 5pp or more. HIGH CONFIDENCE requires 8pp+ and a validated same-event twin on the other platform pulling the same direction — most contracts have no such twin, so many days produce no HIGH flags at all. That scarcity is the design. Everything else lands at MEDIUM or LOW, with a free 3–5pp watchlist band of forming edges below the flag bar. The Kelly fraction shown is quarter-Kelly, sized on a cost-adjusted entry price, not the headline edge.
Caveat: a flag is a signal to investigate, not a guaranteed trade. The engine now validates cross-platform matches with an LLM same-event gate, so the old “same name, different event” pairs are filtered out — but still read both contract pages and confirm the resolution criteria before sizing.
What Is the Mispricing Scanner?
The Mispricing Scanner is a daily automated scan of Kalshi and Polymarket binary markets. It publishes a contract only when the same event is listed on the other venue and a resolution-criteria check confirms both contracts settle on the same terms, so their prices can be compared at all. Without that confirmation there is no flag — two contracts with similar names and different settlement rules are not the same market.
Kalshi anchors the primary scan because it lists the broader set of contracts our other tools already cover, not because of any difference in legal access — both venues are open to US traders. A Polymarket price shown here comes from its international order book, a separate exchange from Polymarket US with its own liquidity and settlement, so the two are not interchangeable.
How It Works
For each platform: Agent A looks for the same event on the other platform — a title pre-filter, then an LLM gate confirming both contracts resolve on identical criteria before the prices are compared (no validated twin → no cross-reference). Agent B asks Claude for an independent probability estimate. Both feed into a Bayesian weighted average. Divergences of 5pp+ are flagged and 3–5pp near-misses go to the free watchlist band; HIGH CONFIDENCE needs 8pp+ and a validated twin agreeing, which is why it is rare.
When to Use This Tool
Check the scanner in the morning once the day's scan has posted — usually by 10 AM ET. HIGH CONFIDENCE flags are the priority when there are any; otherwise work the widest divergences down. Verify the cross-platform match is the same event, check for overnight news that could explain the gap, then size with the quarter-Kelly fraction shown. This is a signal to investigate, not a guaranteed trade.
Read the Methodology
The scanner's design decisions are written up in full, including the ones that make the board publish less rather than more: how the Polymarket Mispricing Scanner works is the place to start. From there, what HIGH CONFIDENCE actually requires explains why that tier is rare by construction, and why the scanner fails closed covers what happens when the model cannot reach a confident estimate — it publishes nothing instead of guessing. If you are weighing whether any of this is tradeable at all, why most prediction market arbitrage isn't real is the honest version of the answer.
MARKET INTELLIGENCE
Find markets where the crowd got it wrong
What is this?
The crowd is often right. But not always. This scanner identifies prediction market contracts where the price seems significantly out of line with real-world data — news, historical base rates, or statistical models.
Think of it as a lie detector for market prices. When a market is way overpriced or underpriced relative to reality, this flags it. You still have to decide — but this gives you the shortlist of where to look.
Real-World Example
→ The Flag
Historical data shows government shutdowns resolve within 14 days 84% of the time. A market asks "Shutdown lasts more than 21 days" — priced at 55¢ (the crowd thinks 55% likely). That's a mispricing signal.
The scanner flags the gap: historical base rate says this should be worth about 16¢, not 55¢. You buy NO at 45¢ (inverse of YES at 55¢) and wait.
✅Action: Use this as your daily deal-finder. Look for anything flagged more than 15 points from the estimated fair value.
Bottom line: The crowd panics, overreacts, and misprices markets every day. This helps you catch it.
Full guide →Loading today's scan
Checking Bayesian engine results...
Read the fine print
Half the edge in prediction markets is knowing exactly how a contract resolves. We read the official resolution rules of the markets traders care about and flag the traps — which data print counts, the exact metric, rounding, and settlement timing.
Today's trapWill above -25000 jobs be added in November 2026?Resolves YES if the BLS Monthly Employment Situation Report shows total non-farm payroll employment change for November 2026 is strictly greater than -25,000 jobs.3 traps
- Double-negative threshold easy to misread — The bar is above -25,000 (i.e., losses smaller than 25,000 OR any gain qualify as YES), meaning even a deeply negative print like -24,999 resolves YES — traders may intuitively read this as requiring job growth.
- Initial release vs. subsequent BLS revisions — The rules say 'as reported' but do not specify whether the first release (typically the following month) or a later revised print governs; if a revision flips the number across the -25,000 threshold, settlement outcome could differ depending on which print is used.
- Strict inequality — exactly -25,000 resolves NO — The rule says 'above -25,000,' so a print of exactly -25,000 does not meet the threshold and resolves NO, which matters in an edge scenario near that level.
Will above 0 jobs be added in September 2026?Resolves YES if the Bureau of Labor Statistics Monthly Employment Situation Report shows total non-farm payroll employment change strictly above 0 for September 2026.3 traps
- Initial release vs. later revisions — BLS revises payroll figures in subsequent months; the rules say 'as reported' but don't specify whether it's the first print or a revised print, creating ambiguity about which release triggers settlement.
- Strictly above 0, not exactly 0 — A print of exactly 0 jobs added resolves NO, so a near-zero outcome on either side of zero is a critical threshold traders must watch closely.
- September 2026 report release timing — The September 2026 employment data is published in early October 2026, so the contract won't settle in September itself — traders holding positions must account for this timing gap.
Will above 100000 jobs be added in September 2026?Resolves YES if the Bureau of Labor Statistics Monthly Employment Situation Report shows total non-farm payroll employment increased by more than 100,000 in September 2026.3 traps
- Initial release vs. later revisions — BLS revises payroll figures in subsequent months; the rules don't specify which print (first release or a revision) triggers resolution, which could matter if the initial number is near the 100,000 threshold.
- Strict 'above' — 100,000 exactly does NOT resolve YES — The rules say 'above 100000,' meaning a print of exactly 100,000 jobs added would resolve NO, not YES.
- Report release timing vs. settlement date — The September 2026 Employment Situation is typically released in early October 2026; traders must account for the contract remaining open until that report is published, not the end of September.
Will above 60000 jobs be added in September 2026?Resolves YES if the BLS Monthly Employment Situation Report shows total non-farm payroll employment increased by more than 60,000 in September 2026.3 traps
- Initial release vs. later revisions — BLS non-farm payroll figures are revised twice after the initial release (and again annually); the rules don't specify which print is used, so a trader must confirm whether the first published number or a subsequent revision governs settlement.
- Strict 'above' threshold — 60,000 excluded — The rules say 'above 60,000,' meaning an exact print of +60,000 resolves NO; only a figure strictly greater than 60,000 triggers YES.
- Report release timing vs. settlement date — The September 2026 jobs report is typically released in early October 2026, so the contract cannot settle in September itself — traders should account for this lag when managing positions.
Will above 125000 jobs be added in September 2026?Resolves YES if the BLS Monthly Employment Situation Report shows total non-farm payroll employment increased by more than 125,000 in September 2026.3 traps
- Initial release vs. later revisions used — BLS non-farm payroll figures are revised in subsequent months; if the contract settles on the first print (released in early October 2026) rather than revised figures, a number that initially clears 125K could later be revised below it (or vice versa), and the resolution outcome would not change.
- Strictly above 125,000, not at or above — The rule says 'above 125,000,' meaning an exact print of 125,000 resolves NO — traders must account for this strict inequality, not a ≥ threshold.
- September report released in October 2026 — The September 2026 employment situation is published in early October 2026, so contract settlement will lag the reference month by roughly one month, affecting timing of position management.
Will the upper bound of the federal funds rate be above 4.75% following the Fed's Sep 16, 2026 meeting?Resolves YES if the Federal Reserve's official website shows the federal funds rate upper bound is strictly greater than 4.75% after the September 16, 2026 FOMC meeting.3 traps
- Strict 'greater than' threshold, not ≥4.75% — The upper bound must be ABOVE 4.75% — if the rate stays at exactly 4.75%, the contract resolves NO, making the current rate a critical boundary level to monitor.
- Sep 16 is not a scheduled FOMC meeting date — FOMC meetings are typically held over two days; September 16, 2026 does not align with current published FOMC schedules, raising the risk of a void/cancellation or resolution ambiguity if no meeting occurs on that exact date.
- Source locked to Fed's official website only — Resolution depends specifically on the Federal Reserve's official website publication, not CME, Bloomberg, or other data providers — any delay or discrepancy in that specific publication could affect settlement timing.
Will above -50000 jobs be added in August 2026?Resolves YES if the BLS Monthly Employment Situation Report shows total non-farm payroll employment change for August 2026 is strictly greater than -50,000 (i.e., job losses are fewer than 50,000, or any positive number).3 traps
- Double-negative threshold: -50,000 floor — The bar is 'above -50,000,' meaning even a large net job loss (e.g., -49,000) resolves YES — traders may instinctively read it as a positive-jobs requirement.
- Initial release vs. later BLS revisions — The rules don't specify whether the first print (released ~first Friday of September 2026) or a subsequent revision is used, which matters if the initial report is near the -50,000 threshold and gets revised across it.
- Strict 'above' vs. 'at or above' wording — A print of exactly -50,000 resolves NO because the rule requires strictly above -50,000, not at or above.
Will the upper bound of the federal funds rate be above 4.50% following the Fed's Sep 16, 2026 meeting?Resolves YES if the Federal Reserve's official website shows the federal funds rate upper bound strictly greater than 4.50% after the September 16, 2026 FOMC meeting.3 traps
- Strictly greater than, not greater-or-equal — An upper bound of exactly 4.50% resolves NO — the rule requires *above* 4.50%, so a hold at the current 4.50% level is a losing position for YES holders.
- Sep 16 is not a scheduled FOMC date — The Fed's 2026 meeting schedule has not been fully published; if no meeting occurs on Sep 16, 2026 specifically, the resolution trigger ("following the Sep 16 meeting") may never fire or could be interpreted as the nearest meeting, creating ambiguity.
- Source locked to Fed's official website only — Only the rate published on the Federal Reserve's official website counts — any discrepancy between that page and other data sources (CME, FRED, etc.) is irrelevant, so traders must monitor the Fed's own site for the authoritative print.
Will CPI Core rise more than 0.7% in August?Resolves YES if the seasonally adjusted BLS CPI-U All Items Less Food and Energy (Core CPI) for August 2026 shows a month-over-month increase strictly above 0.7%.4 traps
- Seasonally adjusted, not unadjusted figure — The rules specify the seasonally adjusted series; the unadjusted print can differ and using the wrong series could mislead a trader's positioning.
- Strictly above 0.7%, not at or above — A print of exactly 0.7% does NOT resolve YES — the threshold is exclusive, so precision at the boundary is critical.
- Initial release vs. revised print — BLS sometimes revises seasonal adjustment factors; the rules don't specify which print (first release or a later revision) governs, creating settlement ambiguity if a revision crosses the 0.7% threshold.
- Month-over-month, not year-over-year — Core CPI is widely quoted both ways; the resolution is based on the monthly change (MoM), not the annual rate, so traders must track the correct metric.
Will the rate of CPI inflation be above 3.8% for the year ending in August 2026?Resolves YES if the BLS-reported CPI 12-month inflation rate for the period ending August 2026 exceeds 3.8% when expressed to one decimal place.3 traps
- One decimal place is the comparison value — The contract uses the BLS's one-decimal-place figure (e.g., 3.9% resolves YES, 3.8% resolves NO), so the underlying unrounded rate is irrelevant — only the published rounded figure matters.
- Strictly above 3.8%, not at or above — The rules say 'more than 3.8%', so a printed BLS value of exactly 3.8% resolves NO, making the threshold exclusive and critical near the boundary.
- Initial release print, not revisions — The rules reference the BLS-reported value without specifying initial vs. revised; if a revision changes the one-decimal figure after initial settlement, traders need to know which print governs.
Related Tools
Preseason offer
Gridiron Edge Pro — 50% off your first payment
Pro opens every engine on the site — the cross-market arb scanner, the Mispricing Scanner, Thee Oracle, and the silver, gold, oil and bitcoin edge models that price commodity contracts in real time.
$75 for the first year, or $7.50 for the first month. Code applies automatically. Ends Sep 10.
Every signal graded in public, losers left on the board. See the record →
Frequently Asked Questions
Which Kalshi binary markets are mispriced right now?
None that we are willing to publish. A contract only reaches this board when the same event is found on the other platform and an LLM gate confirms both contracts resolve on identical criteria before their prices are compared. Measured across the full scan history, that validated cross-platform check has not once completed — most Kalshi contracts simply have no Polymarket twin resolving on the same criterion. We used to fill the gap with a standalone language-model probability estimate and call the difference an edge. Reviewed against settled results, that estimate did not beat the market price, so it is no longer graded and no longer published. An empty board is the honest output of that rule, not an outage.
What is the Kalshi mispricing scanner?
A daily automated scan of Kalshi and Polymarket binary markets, looking for contracts trading away from a price that can be independently corroborated. The only corroboration it now accepts is a validated same-event twin on the other platform: a title pre-filter narrows candidates, then an LLM gate confirms both contracts settle on the same criterion before any price comparison happens. No validated twin means no flag. The tool is being rebuilt for the 2026 midterms as a markets-versus-pundits tracker, which compares the live market price against named forecasters and ratings outlets instead of against a model of our own.
Do Kalshi vs Polymarket mispricing flags actually pay out?
We stopped claiming they do. The scanner's original thesis was that our probability model could out-predict a liquid market. Checked against settled outcomes by price band, the claimed win rate exceeded the actual win rate in every band — the model was not beating the market, it was disagreeing with it. Rather than retune a losing signal, the tool now grades nothing that lacks a validated cross-platform price check, and publishes nothing it will not grade. The rebuilt version inverts the claim entirely: the market price becomes the benchmark and named pundits are the comparison, which is a scoreboard rather than a trade signal.
How does the scanner engine detect mispricings?
It compares a contract's price against a corroborating price for the same event on the other venue. A title pre-filter narrows candidates, then an LLM gate confirms both contracts resolve on the same event and criterion — without that confirmation there is no cross-reference and no flag, because two contracts with similar names and different settlement rules are not the same market and their prices are not comparable. The engine previously also weighted in a standalone language-model estimate; that input no longer produces a published flag on its own.
Why is the mispricing board empty?
Because the gate that would put something on it has not cleared. A flag requires a validated same-event twin on the other platform, and across the entire scan history no scanned Kalshi contract has had one that passed the resolution-criteria check. The alternative — publishing our model's disagreement with the market as though it were an edge — is exactly what the settled record showed did not work. Showing nothing is the correct output of an honest rule, and the board will refill only if the cross-platform check starts clearing.
Is the Mispricing Scanner free to use?
The board itself is a Pro tool at $14.99 per month, though it is currently publishing nothing while the tool is rebuilt for the midterms. The free tools — EV Calculator, Probability Converter, and Combo Edge Builder — cover the core math if you want to check a single contract yourself, and the Combo Edge Builder is fully free with no leg cap.
What is the difference between the Kalshi scan and the Polymarket scan?
They swap which venue anchors the price check: the Kalshi scan looks for the corroborating price on Polymarket, and the Polymarket scan looks for it on Kalshi. Kalshi is the primary scan because it lists a broader set of US-available contracts and its markets are the ones our other tools already cover — not because of any difference in legal access. Both venues are open to US traders. Note that a Polymarket price we quote comes from its international order book, which is a separate exchange from Polymarket US and does not share its liquidity or settlement, so the two prices are not interchangeable.