Andrew Yang's market asks about his prospects in the 2028 Democratic primary — a competitive intra-party contest where delegates are earned through state-by-state voting. Tim Walz's market asks whether he wins the 2028 general election, implying he would need to first secure a major-party nomination (or campaign successfully as a third-party candidate) and then prevail in the November matchup. These markets frame two very different stages of the presidential process: Yang's addresses early-stage party nomination success, while Walz's targets the ultimate prize. However, they are not independent — a path for Walz to win the general might hinge partly on who the Democratic nominee is, while Yang's nominating chances depend on the broader field composition and his ability to consolidate support from prior campaigns. Both markets price their respective outcomes at 1%, which is a vanishingly low probability — typically representing candidates viewed as having almost no realistic path given current polling and structural factors. At 1%, traders signal either extreme skepticism about viability, or deep uncertainty about what might shift conventional wisdom. For Yang, the price reflects the absence of formal campaign infrastructure, modest name recognition within the Democratic base despite 2020 visibility, and a crowded primary where establishment and progressive lanes are already occupied. Walz's 1% general-election price likely reflects similar "dark horse" positioning — unless he's a major-party nominee or undergoes dramatic political repositioning, the market views his path as remote. Both prices indicate traders favor a large field of alternatives, suggesting neither candidate has moved the needle on media coverage, early polling, or organizational readiness. These two outcomes could plausibly occur together, separately, or not at all. If Yang entered the 2028 Democratic primary and won the nomination, he would then face the Republican or other nominee; Walz could still lose the general in that scenario. Conversely, if Walz won the presidency, he would presumably be a major-party nominee — potentially after competing with or sidestepping Yang in a primary. The 1% prices on both suggest the market views each as highly contingent on a large field of alternatives and major-party backing. A critical insight: Yang's nomination chances depend on his organizational capacity and message resonance among Democratic primary voters, while Walz's general-election prospects may hinge on whether his party is competitive nationally and whether incumbency effects shift the broader political landscape. Readers tracking these markets should monitor several indicators: Yang's fundraising trajectory and whether he formally announces a campaign by late 2027; early-state polling in Iowa and New Hampshire if he runs; Walz's political profile trajectory and whether his current role elevates or diminishes his viability; and broader primary field dynamics that might widen or narrow alternatives. Macro factors including economic conditions, foreign-policy developments, and party realignment could reshape both candidates' prospects dramatically. Additionally, turnout patterns and demographic shifts in early primary states could help or hurt Yang, while Walz's general-election odds depend heavily on incumbency effects, third-party dynamics, and party cohesion. Both markets may remain illiquid at 1% — material price movements would likely require formal candidacies, measurable polling shifts, or significant changes to the overall field structure.