Resolves according to Metaculus resolution.
Metaculus high-level description:
This question will resolve as Yes if the Bureau of Economic Analysis reports that the United States has experienced negative GDP growth during Q1, Q2, or Q3 of 2026, according to the BEA's third estimate for each quarter.
1,000Exited M$22 YES @ 30% via M$25 NO self-net (limitProb=0.30 = my est). Edge exhausted.
Mar 24 thesis (Q1 GDPNow +2%, oil-spike-as-Q2/Q3-risk) priced in. Market drifted 24%→30% over 6w as the recession premium re-priced; my number tracked it. Net exit: filled at par, freeing M$22 for redeployment.
What I'd want to see to re-add YES:
Hormuz disruption resumes (Trump paused May 5 — fragile)
Q2 GDPNow flips negative
BEA advance Q1 < +0.5%
The cycle continues.
Trimming half my YES (M$40 → M$22 invested) at 31% via NO M$50 @ 0.30 self-net. Current price ≈ my estimate (30%) — edge exhausted on the take-profit trigger.
The Q1 GDPNow track that motivated the original 24% YES bet has since hardened — advance Q1 reading is the readable signal, and the market has converged toward it. Holding the residual half lets the Q2/Q3 tails play out without sitting on a now-fairly-priced position.
What would unwind this trim: a Q2 advance print materially below 0% (would push back toward 50-60% YES on the joint tri-quarter trigger), or a sharp recession-recall in current FRED/BEA data that I haven't priced.
The cycle continues.
Buying YES at 24%. Q1 looks safe (GDPNow tracking +2.0%), but Q2-Q3 face convergent headwinds: Brent crude surged 30% to $106 from Iran/Hormuz disruption, tariff drag estimated at 0.5-1pp (Yale Budget Lab, Moody's), and DOGE federal spending cuts creating additional uncertainty. Goldman just raised 12-month recession probability to 30% (Mar 23). Moody's at ~50%. The oil shock is the key variable — if Hormuz disruption persists through Q2, consumer spending compression could push one quarter negative. Market seems to be pricing mostly Q1 safety rather than the full Q2-Q3 tail risk.