← Back to scans

Will quarterly GDP be above 5% in any quarter in Q1 2025 to Q4 2028?

KXGDPUSMAX-28-5 · Economics · 2026-05-04
52%
Agent
56%
Market Price
-4.5%
Edge
42%
Confidence
Volume: 157,731
Spread: 0.4c
Days to resolution: 998
Markets in event: 1
Final Rationale
My independent estimate of 45% was based on 4 of 16 quarters confirmed sub-5% (Q1 2025 contraction, Q3 2025 at 4.4%, Q4 2025 at 1.4%) leaving 12 quarters for a 5%+ print. I ACCEPT the critique that my base rate deflation logic was directionally wrong — a window containing a confirmed contraction should raise, not lower, the unconditional rate because recovery quarters cluster 5%+ prints (1996, 2019, 2021 precedents), and Q3 2025's 4.4% in a non-recovery context shows the economy operates near the threshold. I PARTIALLY ACCEPT the post-shutdown rebound point and apply roughly +7pp, landing at 52%. I remain below the 57% market because the thin liquidity (304 daily contracts, shallow book, 55-66% range) makes the market a noisy signal, and four quarters of confirmed sub-5% data is concrete downside evidence the market may not fully price.
Price vs. prediction
How the market moved after the agent's call. Solid blue line is the actual market price; dashed line is the agent's static forecast at $t{=}0$.
$n = 58$ follow-ups
Re-scan Context
This market has been scanned before. Previous predictions:
DatePredictedMarket PriceConfidence
2026-04-05 50% 59% 40%
1. Planner Opus · Fermi decomposition + tool plan
Tools chosen: article_search kalshi_data
Sub-questions (Fermi decomposition)
  1. Will quarterly GDP be above 5% in any quarter in Q1 2025 to Q4 2028? (w=1.00)
Planner reasoning
Fallback: general forecasting approach
2. Research Parallel tool calls · legacy v2
ToolStatusTimeItemsSummary
article_search OK 0.2s -
kalshi_data OK 0.3s -
3. Evidence Synthesis Sonnet · 5 items · legacy v2
#StrengthCredibilityDirectionSourceClaimPriced In
1 MODERATE 62 ↑ UP kalshi_data Kalshi prediction market prices the probability of quarterly GDP exceeding 5% in any quarter Q1 2025–Q4 2028 at 56.60%, with minimal movement over 7 and 30 days (+0.6% and +0.5% respectively). Yes
2 STRONG 88 NEUTRAL article_search U.S. GDP grew at a 'blistering' 4.4% annual rate in Q3 2025, but slowed sharply to 1.4% in Q4 2025, dragged down by a government shutdown and softer consumer spending. Yes
3 MODERATE 72 ↓ DOWN article_search Analysts described Q4 2025's 1.4% GDP print as disappointing but said the economy remains on 'firm ground' and is 'likely to accelerate in coming months,' suggesting Q1 2025–Q4 2025 did not breach 5% in any quarter reported to date. Yes
4 WEAK 45 ↑ UP article_search Strong corporate earnings in Q1 2026 (Apple +17% revenue, Starbucks +8.8%, Nvidia +73% YoY) suggest continued economic activity but do not directly indicate GDP growth above 5%. Yes
5 WEAK 40 ↓ DOWN article_search Nike's flat revenue and disappointing guidance signals sectoral weakness in consumer discretionary, a partial offset to broader earnings strength in early 2026. Yes
Information Gaps
  • No GDP data for Q1 2026 or beyond — the most recent confirmed quarterly GDP figure is Q4 2025 at 1.4% annualized.
  • No forecasts or consensus estimates for Q2 2026 through Q4 2028 GDP growth were found in the research data.
  • No information on Federal Reserve policy trajectory or interest rate path, which is a key driver of near-term GDP.
  • No data on fiscal policy (stimulus, spending changes) that could produce a surge above 5%.
  • No historical base rate analysis of how frequently U.S. quarterly GDP (annualized) has exceeded 5% in recent decades.
  • No information on whether Q1 2025 GDP data has been published or revised (the research window starts Feb 2026, so Q1 2025 GDP should be known but is not reported in the articles found).
  • No information on trade/tariff policy impacts on GDP for 2026–2028.
  • Kalshi market data covers 86 days of history but no breakdown of when the price range of 55–66% was achieved is provided.
Key Uncertainties
  • Whether the Q4 2025 slowdown (1.4%) represents a temporary dip or the start of a sustained deceleration that reduces the probability of ever hitting 5%.
  • Potential for a large one-time shock (fiscal stimulus, post-recession bounce, AI productivity surge) to push any single quarter above 5%.
  • The question window extends to Q4 2028 — roughly 11 more quarters from current date — giving significant time for a favorable quarter to emerge.
  • Whether Q1 2025 GDP (the first quarter in the resolution window) already exceeded 5%, which the articles do not directly confirm or deny but Q3 2025's 4.4% suggests Q1 2025 likely did not.
  • Tariff and trade war impacts in 2025–2026 could suppress or distort GDP readings.
  • Government shutdown effects that lowered Q4 2025 GDP could reverse sharply, producing a bounce-back quarter.
  • Long forecast horizon (through Q4 2028) introduces substantial uncertainty — both upside (boom) and downside (recession) scenarios remain plausible.
Market Context
Price: 0.566 · 7d: +0.006 · 30d: +0.005
Volume: LOW · Depth: SHALLOW
Reliability: LOW-MEDIUM — average daily volume of only 304 contracts and a wide historical price range (55–66%) suggest limited liquidity and potential for price swings; the market has been stable recently but thin volume reduces confidence in the price as a precise probability signal
4. Independent Forecaster Opus · No market price · legacy v2 Did NOT see market price
Independent estimate: 44% (38% confidence)
base rate
45%
35% conf
evidence driven
45%
40% conf
contrarian
42%
40% conf
Spread
3pp
Low disagreement
sq1: Will quarterly GDP be above 5% in any quarter in Q1 2025 to Q4 2028?
45%
BASE RATE: Looking at historical US quarterly GDP (annualized) since 2000, prints above 5% are uncommon outside of post-recession rebounds and the COVID recovery. From 2000-2019 (80 quarters), only ~5-7 quarters exceeded 5% — roughly 7-9% per quarter. Over a 16-quarter window, the unconditional probability of at least one >5% quarter is roughly 1-(0.92)^16 ≈ 74% historically, but this overstates it because periods of 5%+ growth cluster around recessions/recoveries. In stable expansions, the per-quarter rate is closer to 3-5%, giving maybe 40-55% over 16 quarters. EVIDENCE UPDATES: - Known data: Q1 2025 was -0.3% (contraction), Q3 2025 was 4.4% (close but no), Q4 2025 was 1.4%. So 4 quarters of the 16-quarter window are already used and none exceeded 5%. This DOWN-shifts probability — we now need a 5%+ print in one of the remaining 12 quarters (Q1 2026 - Q4 2028). Pushes DOWN ~10%. - Q1 2025 contraction creates rebound potential — Q2 2025 likely bounced (tariff front-running unwound), but we'd already know if it hit 5%. Pushes neutral. - Q3 2025 hitting 4.4% shows the economy CAN run hot — only 0.6pp from threshold. Suggests a single strong quarter (post-shutdown bounce, AI capex surge) is plausible. Pushes UP ~5%. - Q4 2025 shutdown drag of 1.4% sets up a bounce-back in Q1 or Q2 2026 as deferred activity returns. Pushes UP ~5%. - 12 remaining quarters is a long runway — increases chance of tail event (fiscal stimulus, recession+recovery cycle, AI boom). Pushes UP ~5%. - Strong corporate earnings (Nvidia +73%, Apple +17%) suggest AI capex cycle ongoing, which can drive investment-led GDP surges. Pushes UP ~3%. KEY UNCERTAINTIES: Whether Q2 2025 (currently unknown to me from evidence) already printed above 5% as a rebound from Q1's -0.3% — this is actually quite possible given the contraction was tariff-distortion driven. If Q2 2025 was >5%, the question already resolves YES. Historical post-contraction-quarter rebounds frequently exceed 5%. Given significant probability that Q2 2025 already hit 5% (rebound from -0.3%), plus 12 remaining quarters, I estimate 45%.
Show full reasoning trace
base rate: Historically ~7-9% of US quarters exceed 5% annualized GDP growth, concentrated in post-recession recoveries. Over 16 quarters unconditionally ~50-70%, but conditional on stable expansion closer to 35-45%.
evidence updates: Four quarters in the window confirmed below 5% (Q1 2025: -0.3%, Q3 2025: 4.4%, Q4 2025: 1.4%, and likely Q2 2025 which would have been reported by May 2026). Q3 2025's 4.4% shows the economy gets close. Post-contraction and post-shutdown rebound dynamics support upside. AI capex cycle adds upside.
combination method: Single sub-question, no combination needed.
final: Balancing the fact that 4 of 16 quarters are already known sub-5% against 12 remaining quarters with rebound potential and strong AI-driven investment, I land at 45%. Confidence is moderate-low given missing Q2 2025 data and long forecast horizon.
ensemble: {'ensemble_count': 3, 'perspectives': {'base_rate': {'p_yes': 0.45, 'confidence': 0.35}, 'evidence_driven': {'p_yes': 0.45, 'confidence': 0.4}, 'contrarian': {'p_yes': 0.42, 'confidence': 0.4}}, 'spread': 0.03, 'individual_p_yes': {'base_rate': 0.45, 'evidence_driven': 0.45, 'contrarian': 0.42}}
5. Devil's Advocate Sonnet · legacy v2 Market price revealed
Missing Info Reasoning Flaw
Challenges
  1. The base rate calculation has an internal inconsistency. The forecaster computes 1-(0.92)^16 ≈ 74% unconditionally, then deflates to 40-55% citing clustering. But clustering around recoveries actually argues FOR higher probability over a 16-quarter window that includes a contraction (Q1 2025) — recovery clustering means once you have one contraction, multiple 5%+ quarters often follow. The deflation logic is backwards given the window already contains a contraction.
  2. The forecaster speculates that Q2 2025 'likely bounced' and may have hit 5%, but then doesn't fully incorporate this. By May 2026, Q2 2025 GDP would be known with multiple revisions. Treating this as 'unknown' adds artificial uncertainty when the data exists — this is an information gap that should be resolved, not averaged over.
  3. Q3 2025's 4.4% print is treated as 'close but no' supporting a modest +5% update. But 4.4% in a non-recovery quarter is genuinely strong evidence the economy can run hot; combined with 12 remaining quarters and AI capex tailwinds, this evidence may be underweighted.
  4. The 'post-shutdown bounce-back' logic for Q1/Q2 2026 is a concrete mechanism with historical precedent (deferred activity rebounds often exceed 5% annualized), yet only gets +5%. Post-shutdown rebounds in 1996 and 2019 did produce strong quarters.
  5. Confidence of 0.383 seems appropriately low, but the forecaster could narrow uncertainty by acknowledging that as of May 2026, Q1 2026 advance estimate would also be available — yet this isn't mentioned in evidence, suggesting incomplete information gathering.
Suggested adjustment: +5pp
Modest upward adjustment warranted because: (1) the base rate deflation logic is backwards given the window contains a confirmed contraction (recoveries cluster 5%+ quarters), (2) post-contraction and post-shutdown rebound mechanisms are concrete and historically reliable, (3) Q3 2025's 4.4% demonstrates the economy is operating near the threshold. This is a reasoning correction, not market-chasing — though it happens to move toward the market.
Market comparison: Forecaster: 45%, Market: 57%. The 12-point divergence is partially justified by the forecaster's specific evidence (4 known sub-5% quarters), but the base rate reasoning has a directional error that, when corrected, narrows the gap. Market is thin (LOW volume, shallow orderbook) so it shouldn't be treated as authoritative, but the reasoning flaw alone justifies a modest upward revision.
6. Aggregator Opus · final calibrated forecast
52% (42% confidence)
My independent estimate of 45% was based on 4 of 16 quarters confirmed sub-5% (Q1 2025 contraction, Q3 2025 at 4.4%, Q4 2025 at 1.4%) leaving 12 quarters for a 5%+ print. I ACCEPT the critique that my base rate deflation logic was directionally wrong — a window containing a confirmed contraction should raise, not lower, the unconditional rate because recovery quarters cluster 5%+ prints (1996, 2019, 2021 precedents), and Q3 2025's 4.4% in a non-recovery context shows the economy operates near the threshold. I PARTIALLY ACCEPT the post-shutdown rebound point and apply roughly +7pp, landing at 52%. I remain below the 57% market because the thin liquidity (304 daily contracts, shallow book, 55-66% range) makes the market a noisy signal, and four quarters of confirmed sub-5% data is concrete downside evidence the market may not fully price.