Real prediction market disputes analyzed through SettleRisk's scoring engine. See what our system would have flagged before capital got locked.
polymarketNov 2024 - Dec 202472 HIGH
Bitcoin "Approximately $100K" Market
What Happened
A Polymarket contract asked whether Bitcoin would reach "approximately $100,000" by year-end. When BTC hit $99,800 and hovered there for 48 hours, traders split on whether this qualified. The resolution criteria specified no precise threshold, leading to a 3-week dispute while $2.3M in positions remained frozen. The market ultimately resolved YES after a committee review, but many traders had already exited at a loss during the uncertainty.
What SettleRisk Would Have Flagged
- "approximately" introduces unbounded interpretation range
- No numeric threshold defined for resolution
- Price hovering near boundary creates extended ambiguity window
AMBIGUOUS_WORDINGMETRIC_DEFINITIONEDGE_CASE
Actual Outcome
Resolved YES after 3-week committee review. $2.3M frozen during dispute.
$2.3M locked for 21 days
kalshiJan 2025 - Feb 202558 HIGH
Government API Outage During Resolution
What Happened
A Kalshi market on monthly unemployment data relied on the Bureau of Labor Statistics API as its sole resolution source. The BLS API experienced a 4-day outage during the exact resolution window due to a government IT infrastructure migration. With no fallback data source specified in the rules, resolution was delayed 10 days until the API came back online. Traders holding time-sensitive positions faced unexpected capital lockup.
What SettleRisk Would Have Flagged
- Single resolution source with no fallback specified
- Government API has no uptime SLA for public consumers
- Resolution window coincided with known infrastructure migration
SINGLE_ORACLE_DEPENDENCYEXTERNAL_DEPENDENCY
Actual Outcome
Resolved 10 days late after API restored. No dispute, but significant delay.
$850K locked for 10 extra days
polymarketMar 202565 HIGH
"End of Day" Timezone Dispute
What Happened
A prediction market on whether a CEO would resign "by end of day Friday" did not specify a timezone. The resignation was announced at 11:30 PM UTC (6:30 PM EST). Traders in different timezones disagreed on whether this qualified: EST holders argued the day had ended, while UTC-referenced traders said it was still Friday. The 2-week dispute involved reviewing platform precedent, with the market eventually resolving based on the company's headquarters timezone (PST), where it was 3:30 PM.
What SettleRisk Would Have Flagged
- "End of day" with no timezone specification
- Platform has no default timezone policy documented
- Event occurred in ambiguous window between timezone interpretations
TEMPORAL_AMBIGUITYAMBIGUOUS_WORDINGPRECEDENT_CONFLICT
Actual Outcome
Resolved using company HQ timezone (PST) after 2-week review.
$1.1M locked for 14 days
polymarketFeb 2025 - Mar 202578 CRITICAL
"Significantly Impacts" Geopolitical Market
What Happened
A geopolitical market asked whether new trade sanctions would "significantly impact" bilateral trade volumes. When sanctions were announced, trade volume dropped 12% in the first month. Traders disagreed on whether 12% constituted "significant" — some pointed to historical precedents where 20%+ drops were the threshold, while others argued any double-digit decline qualified. The dispute lasted 3 weeks with no clear resolution framework for subjective terms.
What SettleRisk Would Have Flagged
- "significantly impacts" has no quantitative definition
- No historical baseline or threshold referenced
- Subjective terms require committee judgment, adding weeks to resolution
SUBJECTIVE_JUDGMENTAMBIGUOUS_WORDINGMETRIC_DEFINITION
Actual Outcome
Resolved NO after 3-week committee deliberation. Threshold set at 20% retroactively.
$3.8M locked for 23 days
kalshiDec 2024 - Jan 202582 CRITICAL
US vs EU Regulatory Interpretation
What Happened
A market on whether a specific cryptocurrency would be "classified as a security" by regulators faced an unexpected complication: the US SEC and EU MiCA framework reached different conclusions in the same week. The SEC issued guidance classifying it as a security, while MiCA categorized it as a utility token. The market rules referenced "regulatory classification" without specifying jurisdiction, leading to a 4-week committee review to determine which regulator's determination should apply.
What SettleRisk Would Have Flagged
- "Regulators" without jurisdiction specification
- Multiple regulatory bodies can reach conflicting conclusions
- Cross-jurisdiction regulatory timing creates race conditions
GEOGRAPHIC_AMBIGUITYREGULATORY_RISKAMBIGUOUS_WORDINGSUBJECTIVE_JUDGMENT
Actual Outcome
Resolved YES (US jurisdiction applied) after 4-week review. Precedent set for future markets.
$5.2M locked for 28 days