Strait of Hormuz traffic returns to normal by December 31?

Platform comparison

Market context

Traffic through the Strait of Hormuz is still being judged against a damaged baseline, not a clean return to the pre-crisis pattern. IMF Portwatch’s market test is mechanical: a 7-day moving average of **60 or more arrivals** is enough to resolve Yes, so the key question is not whether a few tankers move, but whether the published weekly average stays at or above that threshold. Recent reporting has described only a partial recovery, with flows well below normal after the 2026 closure episode and subsequent stop-start reopening efforts.[2][4][11]

For calibration, comparable cases suggest that chokepoint traffic can rebound unevenly even after formal reopening. Reuters reported in April that traffic was still below 10% of usual volumes despite a ceasefire, while later June coverage said tanker traffic had picked up after Iran lifted an effective blockade, but was still not fully normalised.[4][18] Other reports in June described traffic settling into a “new normal” of roughly 30 to 60 crossings a day, which is close to but not clearly sustained above this market’s 60-vessel trigger.[12][13] That makes the current 60% YES crowd price broadly consistent with a view that recovery is possible, but not yet proven in the IMF series.[5]

A programmatic trader would watch the Portwatch feed itself rather than headlines: the relevant signal is the rolling 7-day average, so a bot or alert should track the published “Arrivals of Ships” series daily and compare it with the threshold as soon as each update lands. Catalysts are the ones that can alter operator behaviour quickly: ceasefire compliance, any fresh maritime restrictions, and shipping-insurance reactions to renewed clashes or vessel attacks. Reuters reported in late June that traffic slowed again after an attack on a ship and that overall flow remained far from pre-conflict levels, which is the kind of event that can push the moving average back below the line before it fully repairs.[17][10]

Sources: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5

Methodology

Methodologically we separate two layers: the live probability (Polymarket mid-price) and the platform attributes (fee, KYC, settlement currency, payment rails). That keeps the comparison honest — a single canonical probability across the row, with the venue-by-venue trade-offs spelt out in the columns next to it.

Resolution & payout

At resolution the UMA oracle takes over: a proposer posts the outcome with a bond, any token holder can dispute within two hours. Without dispute the result is accepted and the smart contract distributes USDC instantly.

On Kalshi (CFTC-regulated) resolution runs through their in-house clearing engine in USD. Betfair Exchange settles after match end in the account's local currency. Manifold pays no cash — only its in-platform "mana" currency.

FAQ

Where can I trade this market with the lowest fees?

Polymarket is geo-blocked in the US/UK/EU. The easiest 0%-fee broker into the same order book is Kalshi Fees. Kalshi charges up to 7% per trade; Betfair Exchange takes 2-5% commission on net winnings.

Is this market available outside the US?

Polymarket itself is geo-blocked in the US/UK/EU. Always check the legal status of prediction markets in your jurisdiction before trading.

What does Polymarket cost to trade?

Polymarket itself charges 0% — the only cost is the Polygon network fee, typically under $0.01 per transaction. Off-chain venues like Kalshi or Betfair charge 2-7% commission.

How fast are USDC deposits?

Polygon credits deposits after 12 confirmations — usually under 30 seconds. Withdrawals follow the same path and land back in your wallet within minutes.

Do I need to KYC for this market?

On Polymarket directly, no — it's wallet-based. Intermediary brokers like Kalshi Fees trigger KYC only above $1,500 of lifetime trading volume; under that you trade pseudonymously with a single wallet address.