Myriad Markets review

Myriad is an on-chain prediction market with a deliberately low barrier to entry: a three-dollar minimum, a zero maker fee, and settlement in USD1 or USDC.e. Categories cover crypto, politics, economy and sports. For someone testing the instrument with a small stake, the entry cost is among the lowest we list.

The current interface terms identify Myriad Foundation in Grand Cayman and list trading restrictions. This corrects our earlier statement that no operator was documented. A named entity does not establish a trading licence, and we have not completed an account test.

Myriad’s documentation gives its entire settlement process in a single line: “Resolution is managed by the Myriad team based on the Market Rules.” There is no oracle named, no challenge window, no bond and no escalation.

We searched all nineteen of its documentation pages for the words appeal, challenge, bond and escalation. Nothing came back about market outcomes. The only route the documentation offers anyone who disagrees with a settlement is to submit a support ticket — which is to say, to ask the party that made the decision to reconsider it.

To be fair to the venue: per-market rules are published, so you can read what a contract turns on before you trade it. That is the part it does well, and it is why this is not rated at the floor.

The contract in Myriad’s own public repository carries a function called adminResolveMarket, gated on a resolution-admin role, which writes the outcome directly without calling an oracle at all. It is not an inference from bytecode: the function is in the source, in Myriad’s own repository.

Myriad’s own commissioned security audit describes what that role can do without ambiguity. Holders “can resolve markets and set voided payout ratios, giving them control over which side wins”. That is the auditor Myriad hired, writing about Myriad’s contract, in a report Myriad links from its own documentation.

The terms of use reserve no such discretion and disclose no such role. So a user reading the documents they are asked to agree to would not learn that an administrative key can decide which side of their position wins — and that capability is documented in two places the venue itself published, just not the two a user reads.

We are not alleging misuse. An administrative resolution path has legitimate uses, most obviously a broken feed or a market that cannot settle as written, and there is no evidence before us that the role has been used improperly. The finding is about disclosure, not conduct.

What it changes is how a position here should be sized and understood. A contract on this venue is not settled by a mechanism with a bond behind it and a public dispute record; it is settled by a team, with an administrative override available above that, and no documented route to contest either. Price that in.

The cheapest fix is also Myriad’s to make, and we would update this page the day it happened: state the role in the terms of use, say who holds it and under what circumstances it is used. The capability is already public. Only the disclosure is missing.