What if a top bank purges a third of its branches for AI and robots?
A single bank's branch purge is a microcap headcount story, not a macro driver; the listed +2% Nvidia/semis cascade is the model over-reading one efficiency-ratio bump as the whole AI-capex wave. Cleaner trade: long the bank's own multiple on cost-out (rhymes with JPMorgan's 2010s branch-rationalization re-rating) rather than chasing GPUs. Skeptical note: teller cuts run on cheap software, not humanoid silicon, so the robotics read is misattributed.
how we built this number — every step
The class rate is measured from our dated, sourced event library (decade-normalized Poisson — the full table is public at base_rates.json). The variant’s share within its class is the analyst’s editorial call, published so you can audit it. A wider range means thinner precedent. Full recipe: methodology · scored at Reality Check.
The butterfly cascade
How this trigger trickles across markets, left → right — the root shock, its first‑order moves, then the ripple effects. Drag any node; tap a market for its real price history.
Resolution timeline — how this probability is moving
Our model's odds (gold) over time vs the crowd's (Polymarket, blue), from the past toward the 1–3 years horizon. Each dot is a real macro event that nudged the probability — green pushed it up, red pushed it down. Tap a dot for the source. The gold path is an illustrative reconstruction anchored to today's estimate — real dated events, not a live re-estimate history.
What it would mean
If this plays out, it is a risk-off shock. A top bank closes a third of branches for robotic micro-branches and AI, cutting teller jobs and lifting efficiency ratios. The trigger decomposes into signed root‑shocks — Job displacement ▲ · Financial conditions ▲ — which propagate through our causal graph to the markets below.
If it happens — the markets it would move
Biggest moves first. Projected moves are cascade-model priors; hist A–B% = what comparable past events actually did (measured abnormal returns), and model prior · unmeasured marks markets with no analogue backing yet. Tap any market for its price history.
| Market | Class | Projected move | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Nasdaq 100 NDXon Hyperliquid 📈 chart | Index | ▼ -0.2% hist -0.5–+0.09% · other way +0.03% (n=12) |
| 2 | S&P 500 SPXon Hyperliquid 📈 chart | Index | ▼ -0.2% hist -0.37–+0.06% · other way +0.29% (n=12) |
| 3 | Solana SOLon Hyperliquid 📈 chart | Crypto | ▼ -0.2% hist -15.9–+1.16% · other way -3.45% (n=11) |
| 4 | MicroStrategy MSTRon Hyperliquid 📈 chart | Equity | ▼ -0.2% hist -1.01–+0.29% · other way +23.19% (n=12) |
Probable recommendation
Historical precedent — what analogous events actually did
Across 40 analogous events (overlap‑weighted), as abnormal returns — market beta stripped, so it's the event's own effect, not the market backdrop. Shown at 20 days (persistent) and 5 days (immediate); ↺ fades = the two horizons disagree. Confidence = consistency × sample × significance.
| Asset | History says | Abnormal (20d · 5d) | Hit | n | Confidence | vs cascade |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SOL SOL | SHORT | -12.4% · 5d -9.1% | 81% | 20 | 0.42 | ✓ matches cascade |
| Bitcoin BTC | SHORT | -3.6% · 5d -2.0% | 71% | 21 | 0.32 | · |
| High-yield credit HYG | SHORT | -0.4% · 5d -0.0% | 64% | 35 | 0.23 | · |
| Gold XAU | LONG | +0.6% · 5d +0.3% | 58% | 37 | 0.15 | · |
| MSTR MSTR | SHORT | -0.8% · 5d -2.9% | 58% | 37 | 0.14 | ✓ matches cascade |
| Volatility VIX | LONG | +4.2% · 5d +1.3% | 52% | 38 | 0.03 | · |
| US dollar DXY | LONG | +0.3% · 5d +0.1% | 52% | 40 | 0.03 | · |
| 10y yield DGS10 | SHORT | -10bp · 5d -5bp | 52% | 40 | 0.03 | · |
| NDX NDX | SHORT | -0.3% · 5d -1.6% | 47% | 39 | 0.00 | ✓ matches cascade |
| SPX SPX | SHORT | -0.2% · 5d -0.0% | 38% | 40 | 0.00 | ✓ matches cascade |
Why this probability
Branch automation is real trend but closing a third + robotic micro-branches in 1-3yr is aggressive. A base‑rate‑anchored prior, continuously scored against what actually happens — not a forecast.