What if attempts to cap copper prices fail amid a structural deficit and produce disorderly markets?
Attempts by major consumers to cap or stockpile-manage copper prices fail amid a structural deficit, leading to disorderly price discovery and volatility, an intervention-failure commodity scenario.
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 mixed shock. Attempts by major consumers to cap or stockpile-manage copper prices fail amid a structural deficit, leading to disorderly price discovery and volatility, an intervention-failure commodity scenario. The trigger decomposes into signed root‑shocks — Copper ▲ · Industrial demand ▲ · Inflation surprise ▲ · Risk-parity deleveraging ▲ — 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 | Freeport (copper) FCX 📈 chart | Equity | ▲ +0.7% hist -3.51–+1.12% · other way +5.04% (n=12) |
| 2 | Copper XCUon Hyperliquid 📈 chart | Commodity | ▲ +0.7% hist -1.16–+0.76% · other way -0.41% (n=12) |
| 3 | Nasdaq 100 NDXon Hyperliquid 📈 chart | Index | ▼ -0.2% hist -0.31–+0.03% · other way +1.02% (n=12) |
| 4 | 30y Treasury yield DGS30 📈 chart | Rate | ▲ +1bp hist -4.48–+11.03% · other way +3.3% (n=12) |
| 5 | 10y Treasury yield DGS10 📈 chart | Rate | ▲ +1bp hist -3.08–+7.45% · other way +2.3% (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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FCX FCX | SHORT | -3.3% · 5d -2.1% | 67% | 35 | 0.29 | ⚠ differs |
| XCU XCU | SHORT | -1.4% · 5d -0.8% | 58% | 35 | 0.15 | ⚠ differs |
| US dollar DXY | LONG | +0.1% · 5d +0.1% | 54% | 40 | 0.08 | · |
| Gold XAU | SHORT | -0.7% · 5d -0.8% | 53% | 35 | 0.05 | · |
| 30y yield DGS30 | LONG | +10bp · 5d +6bp | 52% | 39 | 0.04 | ✓ matches cascade |
| NDX NDX | SHORT | -0.2% · 5d -1.2% | 47% | 35 | 0.00 | ✓ matches cascade |
| 10y yield DGS10 | LONG | +7bp · 5d +6bp | 50% | 40 | 0.00 | ✓ matches cascade |
| Volatility VIX | LONG | +1.3% · 5d -2.6% ↺ fades | 50% | 35 | 0.00 | · |
| Bitcoin BTC | LONG | +0.8% · 5d -2.8% ↺ fades | 50% | 34 | 0.00 | · |
| High-yield credit HYG | LONG | +0.0% · 5d -0.1% ↺ fades | 39% | 35 | 0.00 | · |