Will Congress pass a new Ukraine assistance package above $20B before 2027?
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 52% YES / 48% NO. Resolution is mechanical — it depends only on the criteria and sources below, not on opinions, headlines, or who "deserves" to win the argument.
- ▸ A discharge petition is 11 signatures from forcing a House floor vote.
- ▸ The Senate has passed comparable supplementals three times with 65+ votes.
- ▸ Loan-structure compromises satisfied a bloc of previously opposed members last cycle.
- ▸ House leadership has said no supplemental moves until border legislation is complete.
- ▸ Aid fatigue is measurable: Pulse tracking shows support down 9 points year-over-year.
- ▸ European burden-sharing agreements may reduce the requested U.S. share below $20B.
Resolution criteria
Resolves YES if a supplemental appropriation providing at least $20 billion in new Ukraine-related security, economic, or humanitarian assistance is enacted before January 1, 2027, per enrolled bill text.
- 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.
Related on Quorly
Discussion · 534 comments
LiveCommittee 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 market is underpricing this. Base rates on comparable outcomes put fair value closer to 60%. Holding YES at 47 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.
Fading the crowd here. "House leadership has said no supplemental moves until border legislation is complete." That blocker has killed similar outcomes repeatedly — I have fair value near 42%.
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.
YES at 52% is the value side. When the resolution source is this mechanical, momentum in the underlying process matters more than commentary.
YES at 52% is the value side. When the resolution source is this mechanical, momentum in the underlying process matters more than commentary.
Following this one closely. The resolution criteria are unusually clean, which is why participation is this high (10.9K forecasters).
This market pairs well with the related Pulse question — the gap between public sentiment and market probability is the interesting signal here.
The market is underpricing this. Base rates on comparable outcomes put fair value closer to 60%. Holding YES at 47 entry.
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.