NVDA reports Q4 FY2026 revenue above $38B?
Market 100.0% against model 91.1%. Resolves in resolved, data updated 14d ago.
Decision layer
Actionable research signal
The model disagreement survives the current gates. This is still research context, not financial advice.
Expected value after costs, not raw probability spread.
How much support the model sees across available inputs.
Thin markets can erase apparent edge through spread and slippage.
Resolution ambiguity, timing, and data quality pressure the decision.
usable feature coverage.
Why / why not trade
One decision layer for the market read.
This public box mirrors the internal diagnostic style without exposing execution controls: decision, probability gap, cost-adjusted edge, blocker, and next thing to monitor.
side NO
91.1% model / 100.0% market
fees, spread, slippage, risk
Model edge survives the current public research gates.
Watch whether the market price moves toward or away from the model.
Read this market in three passes
Model 91.1% vs market 100.0%.
Raw disagreement is reduced by fees, spread, slippage, and risk controls.
Model leans NO
Why this read matters
The model-market gap currently survives the decision gates, but it is still research context and must be judged against the public track record.
NVDA reports Q4 FY2026 revenue above $38B?
Volume $168,100
Market-implied vs model probability
Factor attribution
The model estimates a 9-point lower probability than the market, primarily driven by historical base rate.
| FACTOR | SIGNAL | WEIGHT | LOG-ODDS ΔLog-odds contribution measures how much each factor shifted the model's probability estimate in log-odds space — the mathematically correct way to stack independent evidence. Formula: Δlog-odds = weight × signal. Positive values push the probability up; negative values push it down. Log-odds are converted back to probability via the logistic function at the end. | DIRECTION | DESCRIPTION |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Historical base rate | 61% | — | +0.447 | Bullish | Historical frequency for this kind of event — the prior before any market-specific evidence. |
| Model probability | 91.1% | Prior: 61% · Market: 94.4% | |||
| Confidence (λ)Confidence λ (lambda) controls how much weight to give the model vs. the market. Formula: p_final = λ·p_model + (1−λ)·p_market. λ is derived from data quality, factor agreement, and liquidity. When inputs are weak, the model shrinks toward the market — not toward 50%. | 0.78 | Final: 91.1% = λ·model + (1−λ)·market | |||
Comparable eventshistorical base rate 71.4% - n=21
| Event | Date | Outcome | Prior mkt prob. |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nvidia Q3 FY2025 — Beats but softer guidance | 2024-11-20 | EPS $0.81 vs $0.74 est. Beat, but Q4 guidance midpoint slightly light. | 72% |
| Alphabet Q3 2024 — Search and Cloud beat | 2024-10-29 | EPS $2.12 vs $1.85 est. Google Cloud $11.4B vs $10.9B est. Beat. | 68% |
| Boeing Q3 2024 — Strike and write-downs miss | 2024-10-23 | EPS -$10.44 vs -$3.57 est. $6.2B loss from strikes and defense charges. Massive miss. | 35% |
| Apple Q3 FY2024 — Services record and iPhone beat | 2024-08-01 | EPS $1.40 vs $1.35 est. Services $24.2B all-time record. Beat. | 64% |
| Meta Q2 2024 — AI-driven ad revenue beat | 2024-07-31 | EPS $5.16 vs $4.72 est. Revenue $39.1B vs $38.3B est. Beat. | 68% |
| Intel Q2 2024 — Massive miss and 15,000 layoffs | 2024-07-25 | EPS $0.02 vs $0.10 est. Announced 15,000 layoffs and dividend cut. Miss. | 42% |
| Nvidia Q1 FY2025 — Blackwell transition beat | 2024-05-22 | EPS $6.12 vs $5.16 est. Revenue $26.0B vs $24.6B est. Beat. | 75% |
| Alphabet Q1 2024 — First-ever dividend + buyback | 2024-04-25 | EPS $1.89 vs $1.51 est. Beat + $70B buyback + first dividend. | -- |
| Tesla Q1 2024 — Delivery and margin miss | 2024-04-23 | EPS $0.45 vs $0.51 est. Revenue $21.3B vs $22.3B est. Miss. | 45% |
| Goldman Sachs Q1 2024 — Trading revenue beat | 2024-04-15 | EPS $11.58 vs $8.73 est. FICC and equities trading dominated. Beat. | 60% |
| Meta Q4 2023 — First dividend + massive efficiency beat | 2024-02-01 | EPS $5.33 vs $4.82 est. Revenue $40.1B vs $39.2B est. First dividend announced. Beat. | 68% |
| Amazon Q4 2023 — AWS re-acceleration beat | 2024-02-01 | EPS $1.00 vs $0.80 est. AWS grew 13%, re-accelerating. Beat. | 65% |
Real historical events from the comparable-events library (showing 12 of 21 matched). The model's base rate is the realized frequency over the full matched set.
Scenario treeEngine template
Node probabilities are conditional on the parent; hover for cumulative path probability. Leaf EV is per $1 YES contract at the current price, before fees (fee-adjusted EVs in the table on the left).
| Path | Path prob. | YES pays | EV (YES, after costs) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Threshold hit in first half of window | 41.0% | $1 | -2.9c |
| Threshold hit in second half | 50.1% | $1 | -2.9c |
| Never reaches threshold in window | 8.9% | $0 | -103.0c |
Root-implied probability 91.1% reconciles with the model's 91.1% (±1pt invariant).
Description
Resolves based on the official NVIDIA earnings release for Q4 FY2026 (ending January 2026).
Resolution criteria (verbatim, with analyzer flags)
analyzed by heuristicResolves YES if NVIDIA reports Q4 FY2026 revenue (ending January 2026) above $38 billion in its official earnings release.
Resolves Mon, 02 Mar 2026 03:48:52 GMT. The contract pays on these exact criteria, not on the thesis.
Suggested paper position
Paper position only. No real-money execution
Live open-market tracking
Since the first stored model read on 2026-02-16, the market has moved from 61.0% to 100.0%.
This is a directional diagnostic for unresolved markets, not final performance. Resolved outcomes still determine the official live record.
Data quality76/100 - usable
When features are unavailable, the model increases uncertainty and weights the final estimate closer to the market price. Lower data quality does not mean the market is wrong. It means the model is being appropriately humble.
Risk factor breakdownsim
| Inverse liquidity | 18 | |
| Price volatility | 55 | |
| Resolution proximity | 100 | |
| Data quality | 19 | |
| Category base risk | 40 | |
| Resolution ambiguity | 8 | |
| Regulatory exposure | 0 | |
| Portfolio concentration | 0 |
Composite score 37/100, higher = riskier.