Resolves YES if there are two consecutive quarters of negative real GDP growth, with the starting quarter between 2024 Q3 and 2025 Q2 (inclusive). Otherwise NO.
Resolves according to BEA data, 3rd estimate. See https://www.bea.gov/data/gdp/gross-domestic-product.
May be provisionally resolved based on BEA 1st estimate, but the final resolution will be based on 3rd estimate.
In case BEA changes the way estimates are released or revised, resolves based on the latest official estimate as of 4 months after the end of the quarter.
Note that this is not resolved based on NBER, the official definition of recession in the US. See related:
1,000
1.00Not super related, but here's an update about the 2022 recession that turned out not to have been a recession: it turns out that the revised economic data two years later says we only had one quarter of negative GDP growth after all, not two. https://www.axios.com/2024/09/26/2022-recession-gdp-revision
This is why careful specification of which revision of the data is being using to resolve (as I've done here) is important!
Yes. It's stated very clearly in the description! This definition is much less arbitrary and much quicker to resolve than the official one (although they are usually the same). I will note that many other prediction markets prefer this definition for the same reason e.g. Kalshi.
When you say you were fooled by similar markets, is it because you specifically thought that the two criteria would differ in 2023, or because the commentary on the topic sometimes uses the definitions interchangeably without being specific?
BTW Kalshi (the US regulated prediction market) also does the same thing - uses recession in the title and two quarters negative GDP growth as the criteria. It can be confusing but it's pretty standard.
https://kalshi.com/markets/recssnber/recession
Goldman's 12-month recession forecast at 20%
