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 the Mispricing Scanner 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: Paused: the scanner publishes nothing while it is rebuilt for the 2026 midterms as a markets-versus-pundits tracker. The method above still works by hand — compare a price with a base rate before you take a position.
Bottom line: The crowd panics, overreacts, and misprices markets. The automated scan is paused; the base-rate check is not.
Full guide →Live engines, graded automatically at Kalshi settlement — winners and losers, never edited.
- Bitcoin Edge1,035 graded60% win+$59.18 netavg CLV +2.1pp
- Oil Edge662 graded47% win+$11.46 netavg CLV +4.1pp
- Gold Edge515 graded60% win+$34.34 net
- Silver Edge423 graded57% win+$40.20 net
- NHL Goal of the Day274 graded54% win+$3.00 netavg CLV −0.8pp
- Weather Edge257 graded35% win−$8.97 netpaused
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 trapNamed StormsResolves YES if more than 24 named storms occur in the Eastern Pacific basin during the May 15–December 1 season, as confirmed by the National Weather Service (or equivalent).4 traps
- Strictly greater than threshold, not equal — Exactly 24 named storms resolves NO — the rule requires *more than* 24, so hitting the threshold precisely is insufficient.
- Eastern Pacific basin only — Storms forming in other basins (e.g., Central Pacific, Atlantic) do not count, even if they cross into the Eastern Pacific after naming.
- 'Or equivalent' data source leaves ambiguity — The NWS is the named authority, but the 'or equivalent' clause means a non-NWS agency's count could be used if NWS data is unavailable, potentially producing a different final storm tally.
- Season boundary dates are date-inclusive ambiguity — It is unclear whether storms named exactly on May 15 or December 1 count; a storm forming on a boundary date could be the deciding storm near the threshold.
Will CPI Core rise more than 0.9% in December?Resolves YES if the seasonally adjusted BLS CPI-U All Items Less Food and Energy (Core CPI) for December 2026 prints a month-over-month increase strictly above 0.9%.4 traps
- Seasonally adjusted, not unadjusted figure — The rules specify the seasonally adjusted series; the unadjusted print can differ meaningfully and would not count for resolution.
- Strict 'above 0.9%' threshold — 0.9% does not resolve YES — The rule says 'increases by above 0.9%,' so an exact 0.9% move resolves NO, making the boundary critical for near-miss positions.
- Revision risk — initial vs. revised print unspecified — BLS regularly revises CPI data, and the rules do not clarify whether resolution uses the first release or a subsequent revision, creating uncertainty if revisions cross the threshold.
- December 2026, not December 2025 — The resolution month is December 2026 (reported ~January 2027), which is further out than traders might assume from the title alone, affecting contract duration and carry.
Will above 125000 jobs be added in November 2026?Resolves YES if the BLS Monthly Employment Situation Report shows total non-farm payroll employment increased by more than 125,000 in November 2026.3 traps
- Initial release vs. later revisions — BLS non-farm payroll figures are revised in subsequent months; if the rules don't specify which print is used, it's unclear whether the first (advance) release or a later revision governs resolution.
- Strict 'above' threshold, not 'at or above' — A print of exactly 125,000 resolves NO — the job gain must strictly exceed 125,000, so positions near that boundary carry extra risk.
- Report release date vs. November 2026 month — The November 2026 Employment Situation is typically released in early December 2026, so the contract likely settles weeks after the reference month ends — traders must account for this timing gap.
Will above 100000 jobs be added in November 2026?Resolves YES if the BLS Monthly Employment Situation Report shows total non-farm payroll employment increased by more than 100,000 in November 2026.3 traps
- Initial release vs. later revisions — BLS non-farm payroll figures are revised in subsequent monthly reports and annually, but the rules don't specify which print (advance, first revision, second revision) is used for resolution, creating ambiguity if the initial release is near the 100,000 threshold.
- Strict 'above' threshold, not 'at or above' — The rules say 'above 100,000,' meaning an exact print of 100,000 resolves NO, so positions near the boundary carry extra precision risk.
- November 2026 report release timing — The November 2026 Employment Situation is typically released in early December 2026, so the contract won't settle until then — traders must account for this settlement lag when managing capital.
Will the upper bound of the federal funds rate be above 4.00% following the Fed's Mar 17, 2027 meeting?Resolves YES if the upper bound of the federal funds target rate published on the Federal Reserve's official website is strictly greater than 4.00% after the March 17, 2027 FOMC meeting.3 traps
- Strictly greater than, not at or above — A rate of exactly 4.00% resolves NO — the threshold is strictly greater than 4.00%, so a position holder needs the upper bound to be at least 4.25% (the standard 25 bps increment) for YES resolution.
- Official Fed website is sole data source — Only the rate published on the Federal Reserve's official website counts; any discrepancy between that and third-party data providers (Bloomberg, CME, etc.) is irrelevant to resolution.
- Meeting cancellation or date shift risk — If the March 17, 2027 meeting is cancelled, postponed, or does not result in a published rate update, resolution criteria may not be met and the market could be voided or delayed.
Will the rate of CPI inflation be above 4.2% for the year ending in December 2026?Resolves YES if the BLS-reported 12-month CPI change for the period ending December 2026 exceeds 4.2% when expressed to one decimal place.3 traps
- One decimal place, not full precision — The contract uses the BLS's one-decimal-place figure (e.g., 4.2%), so a "true" rate of 4.24% that rounds down to 4.2% would NOT resolve YES — the threshold is strictly above 4.2% at that rounded precision.
- Initial release vs. revised print — The rules don't specify which BLS release is used; if BLS revises the December 2026 CPI figure in a subsequent release, it's unclear whether the initial or revised print governs resolution.
- Strict "more than" threshold, not "at or above" — The resolution requires inflation to be strictly greater than 4.2%, meaning an exact print of 4.2% resolves NO, so positions near the boundary carry significant binary risk.
Will the upper bound of the federal funds rate be above 4.50% following the Fed's Jun 9, 2027 meeting?Resolves YES if the Federal Reserve's official website shows a federal funds rate upper bound strictly greater than 4.50% after the June 9, 2027 FOMC meeting.4 traps
- Strictly greater than, not equal to 4.50% — A rate held exactly at 4.50% resolves NO — the threshold is exclusive, so traders long YES need a rate of at least 4.75% (the next standard 25 bps increment).
- Specific meeting date: Jun 9, 2027 — June 9 falls mid-meeting (FOMC meetings typically span two days); if the scheduled meeting date shifts or the decision is announced on June 10, resolution hinges on what the Fed's website reflects 'following' that specific date — interday timing could matter.
- Official Fed website is the sole data source — Only the rate as published on the Federal Reserve's official website counts — CME, Bloomberg, or other third-party feeds are irrelevant, even if they report the same figure faster.
- No revision or interim meeting provision stated — If the Fed holds an emergency inter-meeting rate change between the prior meeting and June 9, 2027, the rules only reference the rate following the June 9 meeting, so any earlier emergency move does not resolve the contract early.
Will **real GDP** increase by more than 1.0% in Q1 2027?Resolves YES if the BEA's Advance Estimate of real GDP (seasonally adjusted and annualized) for Q1 2027 shows growth strictly greater than 1.0%.3 traps
- Advance Estimate only — revisions ignored — Only the first BEA print (Advance Estimate) counts; subsequent revisions (Second, Third Estimate) could show a different figure but won't affect resolution.
- Strictly greater than 1.0%, not ≥ 1.0% — A print of exactly 1.0% annualized growth resolves NO, so the threshold is exclusive — the number must exceed 1.0%, not merely equal it.
- Annualized rate, not raw quarterly growth — The BEA Advance Estimate is reported as a seasonally adjusted annualized rate (SAAR), which is roughly 4× the actual quarterly change — traders must not confuse the two figures.
Will the upper bound of the federal funds rate be above 4.50% following the Fed's Mar 17, 2027 meeting?Resolves YES if the upper bound of the federal funds target rate published on the Federal Reserve's official website is strictly greater than 4.50% immediately following the March 17, 2027 FOMC meeting.3 traps
- Strictly above 4.50%, not at or equal — The threshold is >4.50%, so a rate held exactly at 4.50% (the current upper bound) resolves NO — only a rate of 4.75% or higher resolves YES.
- March 17 may not be an FOMC decision date — If the Fed does not hold a scheduled policy meeting on March 17, 2027, resolution could be ambiguous or delayed, depending on how the market handles a date with no corresponding Fed action.
- Official Fed website is the sole data source — Only the rate as published on the Federal Reserve's official website counts — any discrepancy with CME, Bloomberg, or other data providers is irrelevant to resolution.
WTI oil on dayResolves YES if the daily settlement price for WTI crude oil (December 2026 contract) on the settlement date is strictly above the threshold USD/Bbl.3 traps
- Strictly above threshold — exact hit resolves NO — The rule uses 'above', not 'at or above', so a daily settlement price exactly equal to the threshold resolves NO, not YES.
- December 2026 contract only, not front-month — The contract specifies the December 2026 WTI futures contract; if the front-month or any other expiry prints above the threshold on the settlement date but the December 2026 contract does not, it still resolves NO.
- Daily settlement price, not intraday high or close — Resolution uses the official CME/NYMEX daily settlement price (which can differ from the last traded price or the intraday high), so intraday moves through the threshold are irrelevant.
Related Tools
Go Pro · 26% off your first year
Every edge engine on the site, live — $150/yr
Pro opens every engine on the site — the full silver, gold, oil and bitcoin strike grids that price commodity contracts in real time, Thee Oracle, Theta Edge, and the full cross-venue price-gap board.
$111 for the first year, then $150/yr. Code applies automatically. Ends Dec 31. Monthly is $14.99/mo.
Every signal graded in public, losers left on the board. See the record →
Kalshi Mispricing Scanner — frequently asked
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.