Messari: Only KYC Can Curb Insider Trading on Prediction Markets

TheNewsCryptoPublished on 2026-01-20Last updated on 2026-01-20

Abstract

Concerns about insider trading are increasing in prediction markets, especially around geopolitical events. Messari analyst Austin Weiler argues that effective enforcement is only practical on platforms implementing Know Your Customer (KYC) standards. KYC allows platforms to restrict access for high-risk users, increases the cost of abuse, and enables regulatory cooperation. Non-KYC and fully on-chain markets face near-impossible enforcement challenges due to the inability to link wallets to real identities. While platforms like Kalshi enforce strict KYC under CFTC oversight, others like Polymarket have varying practices, and decentralized alternatives often lack KYC entirely. Recent suspicious trades, such as one ahead of a Venezuela-related event, have intensified regulatory scrutiny. Weiler concludes that without identity verification, insider trading cannot be effectively prevented.

Concerns about insider trading on prediction markets are rising again after a string of high-profile bets tied to geopolitical developments and fast-moving global events. As prediction platforms expand into mainstream political and macro markets, regulators and traders are questioning whether the sector can realistically prevent users with material non-public information from exploiting these markets for profit.

Austin Weiler, a research analyst at blockchain intelligence firm Messari, argues that meaningful enforcement is only practical on prediction markets that apply Know Your Customer (KYC) standards.

“For KYC’d platforms, the most effective mechanism is to restrict access upfront for users to specific markets,” Weiler told Cointelegraph. For example, platforms could block government employees, state-linked actors, or politically exposed persons from trading on sensitive political and geopolitical markets.

Weiler acknowledged that KYC alone cannot fully eliminate insider trading. An insider can still share information with a third party who places the trade. Nevertheless, according to Weiler, identity verifications increase the cost of abuse as well as boost the capability for enforcing rules. KYC makes sanctions more likely, builds a trail for documentation, and enables platforms to cooperate with regulators for further monitoring once there is a red flag on transactions.

Why non-KYC prediction markets face an enforcement wall

Weiler asserted that enforcing is extremely difficult on non-KYC and fully on-chain markets. “Nearly impossible” is how he has labeled such situations many times.

Since the platforms lack a connection between cryptocurrency wallets and actual identities, a determination cannot be made regarding the availability of material information to the traders. Transparency on the blockchain may work to ensure flows, but attribution is impossible.

“While all on-chain activity is transparent, transparency alone does not solve the attribution problem,” Weiler said. “Without identity verification, it is extremely difficult to link an on-chain wallet to a specific official, state actor, or insider with confidence.”

Prediction markets can still attempt safety measures even without KYC. The platforms can watch for peculiar activity, set a trade size limit, or slow down trading when large geopolitical developments occur. However, according to Weiler’s theory, these mechanisms end up failing in their objectives. One can get around a size limit by having several accounts or by routing a trade through a middleman and distributing a position across several markets. Consequently, a person can be detected but not deterred.

How KYC differs across Kalshi, Polymarket, and decentralized rivals

The requirements for KYC in the prediction market industry vary significantly, and this serves to condition insider trading risk in this market.

Kalshi operates within a regulated system overseen by the United States Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). It enforces KYC as part of platform onboarding and requires personal information. It can also request additional identity verification documents depending on the case.

Polymarket applies KYC to its U.S.-based users through its U.S. app experience. However, the broader platform has operated in ways that do not always require identity verification for non-U.S. users, according to widely shared community reports. The company has not clearly confirmed all details in its official user guide.

Meanwhile, decentralized alternatives typically provide little or no public detail on KYC practices, and some do not support it by design. Opinion, a decentralized prediction market backed by YZi Labs, does not publicly disclose a clear KYC framework.

Cointelegraph reportedly reached out to Kalshi, Polymarket, and Opinion for comment on identity verification practices but did not receive responses at the time of publication.

Geopolitical bets put prediction markets under the microscope

Scrutiny intensified after reports tied to Venezuela, where an anonymous trader reportedly turned around $30,000 into more than $400,000 just hours before U.S. forces captured former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. That type of timing has fueled suspicion around insider knowledge and raised calls for stricter controls.

In Washington, elected officials have started taking action. U.S. Rep. Ritchie Torres has rallied behind legislation such as the Public Integrity in Financial Prediction Markets Act of 2026, which makes it illegal for public officials to trade in prediction markets when they have material non-public information.

Weiler’s assessment is direct: “Prediction markets could quickly scale, but the industry will not stop insider trading without identity-related enforcement.” KYC policies cannot eliminate a leak, but it is the only system that makes a ban on insider trading feasible.

Highlighted Crypto News:

WhiteWhale Solana Memecoin Crashes 60% After $1.3M Whale Selloff

TagsBlockchainCrypto RegulationsKYCOnchainPolymarket

Related Questions

QAccording to Messari's Austin Weiler, what is the most effective mechanism for KYC'd prediction markets to prevent insider trading?

AThe most effective mechanism is to restrict access upfront for users to specific markets, such as blocking government employees, state-linked actors, or politically exposed persons from trading on sensitive political and geopolitical markets.

QWhy does Weiler claim that enforcement is 'nearly impossible' on non-KYC and fully on-chain prediction markets?

ABecause these platforms lack a connection between cryptocurrency wallets and actual identities, making it impossible to determine if a user has material non-public information. While blockchain activity is transparent, this transparency does not solve the attribution problem of linking a wallet to a specific insider.

QWhat are the key differences in KYC requirements between Kalshi, Polymarket, and decentralized platforms like Opinion?

AKalshi enforces full KYC as part of onboarding under CFTC oversight. Polymarket applies KYC to its U.S. users but may not always require it for non-U.S. users. Decentralized platforms like Opinion typically provide little or no public detail on KYC and some do not support it by design.

QWhat specific event intensified regulatory scrutiny on prediction markets according to the article?

AScrutiny intensified after reports that an anonymous trader turned $30,000 into over $400,000 just hours before U.S. forces captured former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, fueling suspicions of insider knowledge.

QWhat is the core argument Austin Weiler makes about the relationship between KYC and the feasibility of banning insider trading?

AWeiler argues that while KYC alone cannot fully eliminate insider trading, it is the only system that makes a ban on insider trading feasible because it increases the cost of abuse, enables sanctions, builds a documentation trail, and allows platforms to cooperate with regulators.

Related Reads

Gensyn AI: Don't Let AI Repeat the Mistakes of the Internet

In recent months, the rapid growth of the AI industry has attracted significant talent from the crypto sector. A persistent question among researchers intersecting both fields is whether blockchain can become a foundational part of AI infrastructure. While many previous AI and Crypto projects focused on application layers (like AI Agents, on-chain reasoning, data markets, and compute rentals), few achieved viable commercial models. Gensyn differentiates itself by targeting the most critical and expensive layer of AI: model training. Gensyn aims to organize globally distributed GPU resources into an open AI training network. Developers can submit training tasks, nodes provide computational power, and the network verifies results while distributing incentives. The core issue addressed is not decentralization for its own sake, but the increasing centralization of compute power among tech giants. In the era of large models, access to GPUs (like the H100) has become a decisive bottleneck, dictating the pace of AI development. Major AI companies are heavily dependent on large cloud providers for compute resources. Gensyn's approach is significant for several reasons: 1) It operates at the core infrastructure layer (model training), the most resource-intensive and technically demanding part of the AI value chain. 2) It proposes a more open, collaborative model for compute, potentially increasing resource utilization by dynamically pooling idle GPUs, similar to early cloud computing logic. 3) Its technical moat lies in solving complex challenges like verifying training results, ensuring node honesty, and maintaining reliability in a distributed environment—making it more of a deep-tech infrastructure company. 4) It targets a validated, high-growth market with genuine demand, rather than pursuing blockchain integration without purpose. Ultimately, the boundaries between Crypto and AI are blurring. AI requires global resource coordination, incentive mechanisms, and collaborative systems—areas where crypto-native solutions excel. Gensyn represents a step toward making advanced training capabilities more accessible and collaborative, moving beyond a niche controlled by a few giants. If successful, it could evolve into a fundamental piece of AI infrastructure, where the most enduring value in the AI era is often created.

marsbit10h ago

Gensyn AI: Don't Let AI Repeat the Mistakes of the Internet

marsbit10h ago

Why is China's AI Developing So Fast? The Answer Lies Inside the Labs

A US researcher's visit to China's top AI labs reveals distinct cultural and organizational factors driving China's rapid AI development. While talent, data, and compute are similar to the West, Chinese labs excel through a pragmatic, execution-focused culture: less emphasis on individual stardom and conceptual debate, and more on teamwork, engineering optimization, and mastering the full tech stack. A key advantage is the integration of young students and researchers who approach model-building with fresh perspectives and low ego, prioritizing collective progress over personal credit. This contrasts with the US culture of self-promotion and "star scientist" narratives. Chinese labs also exhibit a strong "build, don't buy" mentality, preferring to develop core capabilities—like data pipelines and environments—in-house rather than relying on external services. The ecosystem feels more collaborative than tribal, with mutual respect among labs. While government support exists, its scale is unclear, and technical decisions appear driven by labs, not state mandates. Chinese companies across sectors, from platforms to consumer tech, are building their own foundational models to control their tech destiny, reflecting a broader cultural drive for technological sovereignty. Demand for AI is emerging, with spending patterns potentially mirroring cloud infrastructure more than traditional SaaS. Despite challenges like a less mature data industry and GPU shortages, Chinese labs are propelled by vast talent, rapid iteration, and deep integration with the open-source community. The competition is evolving beyond a pure model race into a contest of organizational execution, developer ecosystems, and industrial pragmatism.

marsbit12h ago

Why is China's AI Developing So Fast? The Answer Lies Inside the Labs

marsbit12h ago

3 Years, 5 Times: The Rebirth of a Century-Old Glass Factory

Corning, a 175-year-old glass company, is experiencing a dramatic revival as a key player in AI infrastructure, driven by surging demand for high-performance optical fiber in data centers. AI data centers require vastly more fiber than traditional ones—5 to 10 times as much per rack—to handle high-speed data transmission between GPUs. This structural demand shift, coupled with supply constraints from the lengthy expansion cycle for fiber preforms, has created a significant supply-demand gap. Nvidia has invested in Corning, along with Lumentum and Coherent, in a $4.5 billion total commitment to secure the optical supply chain for AI. Corning's competitive edge lies in its expertise in producing ultra-low-loss, high-density, and bend-resistant specialty fiber, which is critical for 800G+ and future 1.6T data rates. Its deep involvement in co-packaged optics (CPO) with partners like Nvidia further solidifies its position. While not the largest fiber manufacturer globally, Corning's revenue from enterprise/data center clients now exceeds 40% of its optical communications sales, and it has secured multi-year supply agreements with major hyperscalers including Meta and Nvidia. Financially, Corning's optical communications revenue has surged, doubling from $1.3 billion in 2023 to over $3 billion in 2025. Its stock price has risen nearly 6-fold since late 2023. Key future catalysts include the rollout of Nvidia's CPO products and the scale of undisclosed customer agreements. However, risks include high current valuations and potential disruption from next-generation technologies like hollow-core fiber. The company's long-term bet on light over electricity, maintained even through the telecom bubble crash, is now being validated by the AI boom.

marsbit13h ago

3 Years, 5 Times: The Rebirth of a Century-Old Glass Factory

marsbit13h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片