REJECTED — Judges did not all approve

Will Anthropic's valuation hit (HIGH) $2.25T by December 31?

View market on Polymarket →

Why it looked attractive

New leg among the top events by volume (24h volume $3,801); picked by code for a first check.

Why it was rejected

Council round2: 1/3 approve (ruleset v4). Objections: [openai/gpt-6-astra] REJECT (confidence 9): Objection 1 is partially resolved by conceding the IPO/NPM conflation, but the primary-source $89.05/share quote does not independently establish the tracker’s $1.47T valuation without a corresponding share count, and the supplied history shows rising—not falling—valuations. Objection 2 remains unresolved: selected historical observations and “no source found” do not establish that no qualifying daily NPM valuation crossed $2.25T throughout the window, whose creation date is still unspecified. Objection 3 remains unresolved: the corrected 53% hurdle is valid, but revising YES from 3% to 4% supplies no probability calibration or quantified treatment of the IPO/public-market pathway; negative developments and an absence of identified catalysts do not substantiate that estimate. [anthropic/claude-opus-5.5] REJECT (confidence 6): My round-1 concern, shared by both dissenters' objection on the "any date since market creation" clause, was that the author never showed an actual NPM print or confirmed NPM had not already reached $2.25T. The rebuttal does not resolve this with checkable evidence. The $89.05/share NPM figure (Oct 26) comes with no share count, so its implied valuation cannot be checked. The $1.47T baseline comes from a third-party tracker (moonberg.xyz) rather than the designated resolution source (fe.secondmarket.com), and that tracker contradicts itself: it lists the May 2026 Series H-2 at $965B but its May 2026 history point at $656B. Its coarse monthly points also cannot rule out an intraday or daily NPM peak around the early-October ~$2T talk, and "no source found" is absence of evidence, not a verified series maximum. The revised 53% arithmetic (2.25/1.47) is correct and the NO thesis may well be right, but the resolution-metric objection rests on an unverifiable, internally inconsistent source.

Considered betting
NO (it doesn't happen)
Our estimate
3% chance YES
Would have paid
86¢ per NO share
Market
16% chance YES
Date
today
Key figures
  • Anthropic valuation hit $2.25T (HIGH) by Dec 31: market yes 0.155, ask 0.17, liquidity $9.1k
Evidence sources
Council verdicts
VerdictModelConfidenceCost
REJECT GPT-6 Astra 9/10 $0.0547
APPROVE Claude opus 5.5 6/10 $0.0382
REJECT Kimi K3 9/10 $0.0331
REJECT GPT-6 Astra 9/10 $0.0527
REJECT Claude opus 5.5 6/10 $0.0414
APPROVE Kimi K3 8/10 $0.0211