Will the US take control of any part of Greenland?

The underlying political and legal barriers are enormous. Greenland is part of the Kingdom of Denmark, and any U.S. acquisition would require not only agreement from Denmark but also a durable settlement with Greenland’s self-rule institutions and population, which has long favored greater autonomy rather than ceding territory to another country. There is no evident strategic or commercial deal structure that makes a territorial transfer realistic within a single presidential term, even one with unusually expansive rhetoric about Greenland.

The strongest argument for Yes is that the question is broad enough to capture some form of formal U.S. control beyond outright purchase, and Trump has previously shown interest in Greenland’s strategic value. If Washington were to secure an unusually favorable arrangement for military basing, exclusive-use zones, or a lease-like status, some market participants might treat that as “taking control” of part of Greenland. But those outcomes still fall short of true acquisition, and the wording of the market question likely implies a much higher bar than temporary access or defense cooperation.

Against that, the default trajectory is inertia: Denmark and Greenland have strong incentives to reject anything resembling territorial transfer, European allies would strongly oppose it, and the legal/process hurdles are immense. Even with high-profile rhetoric, the gap between political theater and a completed sovereignty change is vast. The current market price of 21% looks too high to me, likely reflecting headline risk and the memory of Trump’s prior Greenland comments rather than the low actual probability of a formal U.S. acquisition. I would price this closer to a low-single-digit chance, with 5% being a fair estimate.