Will the Federal Reserve cut its policy rate at the July 2026 FOMC meeting?
Peer-to-Peer Order Book
Live- A participant offers to buy or sell a contract at a price they choose.
- Another participant takes the opposite side.
- The exchange matches the orders and holds the collateral.
- Correct contracts settle at $1.00 · incorrect at $0.00.
- Fees are shown before any order is submitted.
What this market asks
In plain language: forecasters are estimating the probability that the outcome in the question actually happens by the deadline. The market currently prices 68% YES / 32% NO. Resolution is mechanical — it depends only on the criteria and sources below, not on opinions, headlines, or who "deserves" to win the argument.
- ▸ Two consecutive soft inflation prints moved swap-implied odds of a July cut above 70%.
- ▸ Three FOMC members have publicly described policy as 'more restrictive than needed.'
- ▸ Labor-market cooling (job openings down 12% YoY) matches the committee's stated cut conditions.
- ▸ The Chair has repeatedly favored quarterly moves aligned with projection meetings — September fits better.
- ▸ Services inflation remains above 3.4%, the stickiest component in the committee's framework.
- ▸ A pre-election cut invites political scrutiny the committee historically avoids.
Resolution criteria
Resolves YES if the FOMC statement issued at the conclusion of its July 28-29, 2026 meeting announces a reduction in the target federal funds rate range of at least 25 basis points.
- Any participant may flag a resolution within 72 hours with cited evidence.
- Trading pauses; positions freeze at last price while flags are reviewed.
- An independent resolution council (rotating, disclosed members) rules within 14 days using only the stated sources.
- Rulings are published with full written reasoning; credits settle after publication.
Discussion · 734 comments
LiveThe market is underpricing this. Base rates on comparable outcomes put fair value closer to 76%. Holding YES at 63 entry.
Committee calendar update: relevant action is now scheduled. In backtests of this market class, a scheduled action adds ~6 points to YES within a week.
The NO side is about timelines, not merits. Even if the outcome eventually happens, the deadline in the criteria is doing a lot of work.
Committee calendar update: relevant action is now scheduled. In backtests of this market class, a scheduled action adds ~6 points to YES within a week.
Committee calendar update: relevant action is now scheduled. In backtests of this market class, a scheduled action adds ~6 points to YES within a week.
Fading the crowd here. "The Chair has repeatedly favored quarterly moves aligned with projection meetings — September fits better." That blocker has killed similar outcomes repeatedly — I have fair value near 58%.
Following this one closely. The resolution criteria are unusually clean, which is why participation is this high (15K forecasters).
YES at 68% is the value side. When the resolution source is this mechanical, momentum in the underlying process matters more than commentary.
The NO side is about timelines, not merits. Even if the outcome eventually happens, the deadline in the criteria is doing a lot of work.
YES at 68% is the value side. When the resolution source is this mechanical, momentum in the underlying process matters more than commentary.
The market is underpricing this. Base rates on comparable outcomes put fair value closer to 76%. Holding YES at 63 entry.
This market pairs well with the related Pulse question — the gap between public sentiment and market probability is the interesting signal here.