US real GDP growth in 2035?
I think the market is too pessimistic about the central 2035 growth range. The most likely outcomes are clustered around 1.6% to 2.5%, with only a modest chance of zero or negative growth.
Analysis
For a 2035 GDP growth contract, the dominant drivers are structural rather than cyclical: demographics, labor-force growth, productivity, capital deepening, and policy credibility. The sources you provided point to a wide cross-country spread, but the only buckets that fit a mature-economy framing are the low-to-mid growth ranges, not the zero-or-below tail. That makes the middle of the distribution around 1.6% to 2.5% the most defensible anchor unless the contract is on an unusually weak economy with persistent stagnation risk.
The available reference points also argue against reading this as an India-style high-growth market. India’s medium-term projections are far above these buckets, while Japan-style mature-economy forecasts sit closer to sub-1% growth. The U.S. and other developed-economy long-range forecasts tend to cluster near or just under 2%, which puts 1.6% to 2.0% and 2.1% to 2.5% in the sweet spot. Negative growth in a single year is always possible, but it usually requires a recession or shock rather than the baseline 2035 outcome.
Compared with the current prices, the market appears to be overemphasizing the low-growth tails and underweighting the central cases. The top five buckets only capture 47% of the market, and the largest listed share is still just 11%, which suggests a very dispersed and somewhat bearish view. I think that is too cautious for a long-horizon annual growth forecast unless the jurisdiction is a structurally declining economy; absent that, the middle buckets deserve materially more weight than the market is assigning.
Arguments
For
- Arguments for Yes: Long-run forecasts for developed economies usually center on modest positive growth rather than outright stagnation.
- Arguments for Yes: The market’s largest weights are still only around the low teens, suggesting the consensus may be over-discounting the central 1.6% to 2.5% range.
Against
- Arguments against Yes: If the underlying jurisdiction is a mature economy with severe demographic drag, growth could easily stay near 1% or below.
- Arguments against Yes: Because the contract year is far out, uncertainty is high and tail outcomes deserve more weight than short-run forecasting intuition would suggest.
Key drivers
- Long-run GDP growth is usually determined by structural fundamentals like productivity and labor supply rather than short-term business-cycle noise.
- The cited country examples point toward mature-economy outcomes clustering near 1.5% to 2.5%, which makes the middle buckets the modal range.
Risk factors
- If the contract refers to a stagnating economy with demographics similar to Japan, the zero-to-low-growth tail would become much more plausible.
- A recession, financial crisis, or major policy error around 2035 could push annual growth into the 0.0% or below bucket.
Scenarios
Best case
A productivity- and investment-led expansion, possibly helped by favorable demographics or policy, lifts 2035 growth into the 2.1% to 3.0% range.
Most likely
The economy lands in the 1.6% to 2.0% range, with 2.1% to 2.5% as the main upside alternative and zero or negative growth as a meaningful but smaller tail.
Worst case
Structural stagnation, aging, or a recessionary shock pushes 2035 growth to 0.0% or below.
Outcomes
| Outcome | AI | MKT |
|---|---|---|
| 0.0% or Below | 8% | 11% |
| 2.1% to 2.5% | 24% | 11% |
| 1.6% to 2.0% | 32% | 9% |
| 1.1% to 1.5% | 22% | 8% |
| 2.6% to 3.0% | 14% | 8% |
More from this day
- techPolymarketEnded
Grok 4.6 released by...?
AI82%MKT2%Edge+80Hidden GemGrok 4.6 looks likely to be released by the deadline, with the strongest signals pointing to an August 7 launch or public availability. The market price appears far too low relative to the reported timeline, though a small risk remains that the release slips or is not broadly accessible enough to qualify.
- PoliticsKalshi1y
2026: Trump's bad year?
AI71%MKT10%Edge+61Hidden GemI think there is a strong chance 2026 becomes a recognizable bear-case year for Trump because multiple legal and institutional fights are already lined up to produce visible setbacks. The market’s single-digit yes price looks too low given how many independent downside catalysts are active.
- FinancialsKalshi13y
Will OpenAI or Anthropic IPO first?
AI34%MKT84%Edge-50HypedI put OpenAI first at about 34%, with Anthropic more likely to reach the public market first given the faster reported timeline and earlier filing reports. The current market price looks too confident in OpenAI's lead relative to the timeline risk.