US x Iran permanent peace deal by May 31, 2026? ↗

Price rose 6.5pp from 20.0% to 26.5% over 19.0h (spike), then reversed. Now at 24.5%, down 2.0pp from peak, 1.0h after the peak. [Prior context: 24h ago: 17.5%, 72h range: 17.5%-30.5%]

Semantic Polarity: YES = a formal, permanent US–Iran peace deal signed/announced by May 31, 2026; NO = no such deal by then. Trend is UP, pricing in the YES-World.
Momentum check: E=2, D=0, L=0 (R=0 unverified).
Incremental only: E=2, D=0 (priced-in: E=0, D=3).
Self-check: no change.
Theta direction: DOWN
Price move direction: UP (from 20% to 26%)
Alignment: OPPOSITE
Theta: DOWN — opposed
No Logical Divergence: the price rose on net-positive process signals (not Strong Divergence).
Key process step: multiple reports that Iran delivered a new proposal to the US via Pakistani mediators (formal proposal/submission), plus Trump saying “Iran is desperate to make a deal,” both increase the pathway to a deal; earlier negative signals (US disavowing an “Obama-style” deal, Iranian distrust, piracy accusation) predated the move and were likely priced in. While these do not satisfy settlement (no agreement signed), in a ceasefire/deal market the shift from “talks frozen/no pathway” to “new proposal on the table” justifies a material repricing (5–15pp), so a 6.5pp rise is reasonable. Therefore the spike was news-supported rather than an overreaction, and a mean-reversion call is not warranted.

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.