How many ships transit the Strait of Hormuz week of May 11?

Platform comparison

Active sub-markets

Market context

The Strait of Hormuz is still carrying commercial traffic, but at a reduced pace relative to pre-crisis norms, and this market is counting total transit calls across 11–17 May from IMF Portwatch. Recent reporting points to a rebound from the sharp early-March drop, with Lloyd’s List and related vessel-tracking data putting daily crossings back in the mid-40s after earlier collapses from roughly 138 a day before hostilities. For a programme or bot built around this market, the key variable is not sentiment but the published Portwatch tally by day, then the seven-day sum; the current 2% pricing implies traders see a full-week total outside the resolution band as the base case.

The closest comparable read is the week-on-week pattern from early May, when traffic was still well below normal but no longer near-zero. ShipFinder said at least 54 ships transited between 11 and 17 May versus 25 the previous week, while UANI described daily transits as still materially depressed from pre-war levels. That kind of step-up matters for conditional orders and automated alerts: if your model is tracking daily Portwatch releases, one extra day in the low-to-mid 40s can shift the weekly sum by enough to move the market, but it would still take a sustained run of high daily counts to push materially above the current expectation.

Watch for fresh shipping advisories, port schedules, and any renewed disruption around naval or commercial routing, because this market settles on reported transit calls rather than AIS noise or anecdotal vessel movements. The most relevant dependency is IMF Portwatch’s publication cadence for the Strait of Hormuz page, since the market resolves once the final day in the window is posted. Traders using copy-trading or script-based entries would normally key off those daily updates and any Reuters, Lloyd’s List, or operator notices about rerouting, suspensions, or resumption of sailings, as those are the inputs most likely to alter the weekly total before settlement.

Sources: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5

Methodology

This page is a comparison snapshot: one live quote (Polymarket), four reference venues with their key attributes, and a single execution path — every trade button routes to PolyGram, which mirrors the Polymarket order book directly.

Resolution & payout

Settlement runs on-chain. Polymarket's contract logic separates YES and NO shares as conditional tokens; at resolution the winning share lifts to $1.00 and the losing one to $0. The outcome input comes from the UMA Optimistic Oracle, which secures against bad resolution with a bond + dispute window.

Once finalised, the smart contract pays USDC to the holders' wallets within minutes — no withdrawal fees beyond Polygon network gas. Kalshi settles in USD via CFTC clearance, Betfair in account currency net of commission, Manifold in play-money mana with no cash-out.

FAQ

Where can I trade this market with the lowest fees?

On PolyGram, which mirrors the Polymarket order book at 0% fees. Kalshi charges up to 7% per trade; Betfair Exchange takes 2-5% commission on net winnings.

How does resolution work?

Through the UMA Optimistic Oracle on Polygon: a proposer submits the outcome, a two-hour challenge window opens, and USDC payouts settle automatically once the result is final.

What's the difference between YES and NO shares?

A YES share pays $1.00 if the event happens, $0 otherwise. A NO share pays $1.00 if the event doesn't happen. The market price between 0¢ and 100¢ is the implied probability.

Do I need to KYC for this market?

Not under $1,500 of lifetime trading volume. Above that threshold, PolyGram triggers a quick verification flow that finishes in minutes.

How reliable are the quoted odds?

The YES/NO percentages are the live mid-prices of the Polymarket order book. On deep markets they move every few seconds; on thinner ones you'll see short plateaus.