These two markets examine related but distinct geopolitical scenarios surrounding Iran's future through 2026. Market A asks whether the United States will launch a military invasion of Iran, reflecting a direct military intervention scenario. Market B probes whether the Iranian regime itself will fall within the same timeframe, encompassing both internal collapse and external pressure outcomes. While an invasion could trigger regime change, they are not automatically linked—a regime could fall through internal revolution or diplomatic pressure without direct U.S. military action, and conversely, the U.S. could launch a limited military operation that doesn't topple the government. The price spread between these markets is notable: the invasion scenario trades at 32% YES while regime collapse trades at 17% YES. This 15-point differential reveals trader conviction about the relationship between these events. The lower probability on regime collapse despite a higher invasion probability suggests markets view full regime collapse as less likely than an invasion, possibly reflecting skepticism about whether military intervention would definitively achieve regime change, or alternatively, doubts about whether regime collapse would occur independently. The 32% invasion price reflects significant uncertainty but not overwhelming consensus, suggesting traders weight both escalation and de-escalation pathways as plausible. These outcomes could correlate or diverge in several ways. A positive correlation would manifest if U.S. military pressure directly leads to regime collapse, either through invasion itself or through economic and diplomatic pressure surrounding military brinkmanship. A negative correlation would emerge if a regime under existential threat becomes more entrenched and resistant, or if international actors intervene to prevent regime change despite military conflict. The markets could also diverge if regime change occurs through internal mechanisms—popular uprising, factional splits within the military, or economic crisis—without requiring U.S. invasion. This divergence scenario is reflected in the lower regime-collapse probability. Traders monitoring these markets should track escalation signals including military buildups, U.S. policy statements, and sanctions; internal Iranian stability indicators such as economic conditions, civil unrest, and factional tensions within the Revolutionary Guards; regional proxy activity in Iraq, Syria, and the Gulf; and international diplomatic efforts toward de-escalation. The geopolitical context will shift these probabilities dynamically. If invasion odds rise sharply, regime-collapse odds may not follow proportionally, revealing whether markets expect decisive conflict or prolonged stalemate. Conversely, if internal Iranian instability accelerates, regime-collapse odds could rise independent of invasion probability, showing the distinct mechanisms at play.