Will Paloma Valencia win the 2026 Colombian presidential election? ↗

Price rose 2.7pp from 32.4% to 35.1% over 1h (steady). Now at 35.1%. [Prior context: 24h ago: 34.2%, 72h range: 32.2%-43.9%]

Days to resolution: 57 days. Theta-bleed is not a major factor here (deadline > 90 days), so time decay does not strongly bias the outcome. Step 1a: There are zero ★DIRECT signals in the news—no new polling, endorsements, or concrete campaign developments directly tied to Paloma Valencia’s probability of winning. The trend is UP (YES becoming more likely), but the news is essentially STARVED of direct evidence for her, and the CONTEXT news is mostly about debates, campaign atmospherics, and other candidates’ activities. The story is plateauing: there is no intensifying narrative or new actors, just repeated coverage of debates and campaign positioning. Step 2: After clustering, there are zero momentum signals (trend=0) and zero resistance signals (counter=0); all news is NOISE or general context. Remaining space: 14.9pp (from 35.1% to 50%). Step 3: Hard rules bind—specifically, with no ★DIRECT signals and the use of "plateauing/starved" in the reasoning, Rule 4 applies, requiring STALL. There is no evidence to justify further continuation, and the move appears to be driven by noise or liquidity rather than information.

the deterministic planner rejected this trade. typical causes: poor R:R, spread exceeds gap, settlement danger zone, market too close to resolution. LLM assessment is above (Stage 6); planner is a pure-math gate layered on top.