1kx 分析师:概述预测市场新玩家及发展趋势

比推Publicado a 2024-08-14Actualizado a 2024-08-14

人工智能代理是预测市场的下一个重要机遇。

撰文:mikey,1kx 分析师

编译:Luffy,Foresight News

预测市场出现了许多新的建设者,因此有必要对这个垂直领域进行一次全面的概述。本文将简要总结预测市场类别、GTM(进入市场)策略、产品更新、机制以及当前的发展方向。

GTM

预测市场 GTM 大致有两种方法:非体育和体育。前者是一个相对未开发的领域,包括几个目标领域:加密货币、政治、文化活动。Polymarket 显然是非体育领域的领导者,其 GTM 主要关注政治事件。

如果比较专注体育赛事的预测市场今年以来的交易量,你会发现 Azuro 和 SX Network 与 Polymarket 的差距更大。

新上线的竞争者包括 EVM 上的 Limitless (其中一些市场支持 ETH 交易),以及 Solana 上的 Hedgehog。此外还有竞争者产品尚未上线,包括:Drift Exchange、xMarkets、Inertia Social、Doxa 和 Contro。

新玩家们普遍聚焦于两个共同主题:

  • 无需许可的市场:开放市场创建和激励层

  • 解决方案:依靠人工智能进行市场结算,或创建更高效的系统

这正是 Polymarket 用户一直期盼的。

鉴于体育类预测市场受欢迎程度和赛事规律性,它们在 Web2 中具有明显的吸引力。很难让用户转移到 Web3,因为大多数用户看重品牌和用户体验。此外,Web2 体育博彩在营销资金上具有优势,至少有 5 家体育博彩公司每年花费 1 亿美元以上。

美国人在单场超级碗上的投注金额(约 230 亿美元)是加密货币预测市场总投注额(约 20 亿美元)的 10 倍。甚至单个州的投注金额就远远超过了 20 亿美元。

链上资金越多 = 链上体育博彩越多,就像互联网博彩公司被手机设备统治一样。预测市场的限制因素之一是缺乏资金。在非体育方面,LogX 将支持 TRUMP 永续产品,类似于 2020 年的 FTX。Doxa 也在研究 lev。这两个项目的交易对手都是流动性池。清算和坏账是潜在的问题。

我希望 Polymarket 更多地探索复式投注模式。从技术上讲,「特朗普和拜登赢得提名」市场是一种杠杆投注,因为它需要猜测两个不同的事件。

我很想看到诸如「a、b、c 和 d 会发生吗」这样的市场,我不认为初始流动性会成为问题,LP 不会错过这样的机会。

在体育预测市场方面,已有多个协议允许通过所谓的 parlays 进行杠杆操作,只有当用户正确猜出多个不相关事件时才会赢得奖金。SX Bet、Azuro 和 Overtime 已经支持这种功能。

机制

预测市场的工作机制大致有两种类型:Web2.5 和 Web3。Web2.5 模式通常将加密货币用作支付渠道,例如 Stake/Rollbit。用户可以使用加密货币下注,但交易对手是应用程序背后的团队,并且产品在链上交互。

Web3 模式的部分产品逻辑会放在链上,无论是 NFT 头寸,还是通过智能合约执行的赌注。通常有两种方式来匹配链上赌注,要么是依赖被动 LP 的 AMM,要么是平台充当交易所的订单簿。

在 Web3 中,Memecoins 本身已经成为预测市,$TRUMP 和 $BODEN 就是典型的代表,持有者可以从两方面获利:1)方向正确;2)吸引注意力。Memecoins 允许你推测其他人的投机行为,无论你是对是错。

一个新的协议叫做 Swaye,尝试结合预测市场和 Memecoins 的优势,早期进入市场的用户不仅押注特定结果,而且有动力吸引注意力,因为任何一方的投注活动都有助于增加 P 损益。

盈利模式

预测市场协议如何盈利呢?有几种方法:

  1. 交易费

  2. 交易者收益的一部分(Web2 模型遵循这条路径)

  3. 交易对手的损益(Web2 喜欢服务亏损的客户)

大多数协议要么采用方法 1,要么采用方法 3。Polymarket 目前不收取任何费用。

下一步

下一步是什么?人工智能代理是预测市场的下一个大机遇,因为它们可以对新闻做出快速反应。它们能够管理订单和下注,它们还可以计算结果的预期值并承担计算出的风险。有几个团队正在研究这一领域。

在未来几年,至少会有 1 个协议与 Polymarket 的交易量正面竞争。考虑到 Polymarket 目前对其市场的激励程度,竞争者可能需要大量使用积分、代币或 USDC 等激励措施。

每个人都在问美国大选后交易量能否持续,到目前为止,Polymarket 上的非选举交易量自今年年初以来一直保持稳定。

说明: 比推所有文章只代表作者观点,不构成投资建议

Lecturas Relacionadas

EF's Epic Reorganization: 20% Layoffs, Budget Halved, Is Ethereum Gearing Up for a Leaner Future?

The Ethereum Foundation (EF) has announced a major organizational restructuring, involving a 20% staff reduction (approx. 54 employees) and a division into functional clusters like Protocol, Access, User, Community, and Institutional layers. Co-founder Vitalik Buterin further revealed plans to cut the EF's budget by around 40% over the coming years, aiming to reduce its annual spending rate from about 15% to roughly 5% by 2030, transitioning to an endowment-driven model. This overhaul is seen as a long-overdue correction to the EF's ambiguous role. As Ethereum grew, the foundation faced persistent criticism over ETH sales, perceived lack of execution, and unclear strategy, often becoming a focal point for community frustration amid ETH's price stagnation. The reform aims to redefine the EF's boundaries, narrowing its focus to core protocol research, public goods funding, and ecosystem coordination, while offloading more applied development work to the broader market. Concurrently, ecosystem forces like the newly formed Ethlabs (founded by ex-EF researchers) and other independent groups are stepping in to fill the space, signaling a shift from a centralized model to a more distributed, collaborative ecosystem structure. The move was notably praised by Solana co-founder toly, who viewed a "leaner" EF as potentially more decisive and agile.

Odaily星球日报Hace 31 min(s)

EF's Epic Reorganization: 20% Layoffs, Budget Halved, Is Ethereum Gearing Up for a Leaner Future?

Odaily星球日报Hace 31 min(s)

Dragonfly Partner Haseeb: The Fastest-Growing Companies of the Future May All Get Stuck at 149 Employees

Dragonfly partner Haseeb explores the distorted economics of AI model pricing, drawing parallels to tax policy. He notes that startups and small teams (under 150 users) enjoy heavily subsidized, fixed-price AI subscriptions (like Claude Code), where the marginal cost of an additional token is effectively zero. This creates a powerful incentive for them to maximize token usage ("token-maxxing") and innovate aggressively with AI automation. In contrast, large enterprises (over 150 users) are forced onto "Enterprise" plans, paying per-token API fees with high (~75%) markups. This acts like a steep "tax" on AI-powered labor, disincentivizing marginal automation and experimental use, and encouraging them to retain more human workers. Haseeb argues this pricing creates a "150-person cliff," a regulatory notch similar to labor laws in France that discourage firms from growing past 50 employees. He predicts the fastest-growing future companies may deliberately cap their headcount at 149 to avoid the punitive enterprise pricing. This would foster an "AI-first" management philosophy obsessed with automation and outsourcing to stay lean. While not intentionally designed, this bifurcated pricing could become one of the most influential de facto tax policies, shaping how AI replaces labor—not through mass layoffs at big firms, but through agile, AI-native startups outcompeting them.

marsbitHace 43 min(s)

Dragonfly Partner Haseeb: The Fastest-Growing Companies of the Future May All Get Stuck at 149 Employees

marsbitHace 43 min(s)

How xBubble Breaks Through in the VC-Heavily-Backed OPC Economy

xBubble: Addressing the Structural Gap in the VC-Backed OPC Economy The concept of OPC (One Person Company) is evolving from a buzzword to a significant AI-driven market. While AI coding tools like Replit and Lovable have validated demand from non-technical users wanting to build applications, a key gap remains: the leap from creating a demo to running a stable, evolving business. These tools still require users to manage the development process, including technical judgments for integrations, modifications, and deployments—a major hurdle for OPCs. xBubble, by DAPPOS, tackles this by shifting from "Prompt-to-Code" to "SOP-to-Business." Instead of generating code from instructions, its core is a system of pre-organized SOPs (Standard Operating Procedures) that translate business goals—like "sell World Cup merchandise"—into complete, executable workflows. This includes generating cohesive assets, pages, payment systems, and backend logic. The platform is augmented by a network of third-party service providers who handle infrastructure (hosting, domains, payment setup), acting like "on-site service engineers." Users can pay for these services directly with xBubble credits, simplifying onboarding. This ecosystem aims to deliver not just an app, but a complete, modifiable business launch path. xBubble targets a clear OPC segment: small commercial nodes (e.g., creators, merchants) with existing products, customers, or channels, but for whom a full tech team is unjustifiable. Its potential lies in SOPs accumulating expertise from real cases, improving reliability and reducing delivery costs over time. Additionally, its native support for crypto payments caters to global or digital-native OPCs. In summary, as AI democratizes software creation, xBubble's opportunity is to prove that "SOP-to-Business" provides more immediate value for launching a real, operational business than a powerful but unstructured AI coding tool.

链捕手Hace 45 min(s)

How xBubble Breaks Through in the VC-Heavily-Backed OPC Economy

链捕手Hace 45 min(s)

If It's Not a Clear Yes, It's a No: A Nine-Year Retrospective by a VC Who Survived Four Cycles

**"Invest Only When Certain": A Nine-Year Retrospective from a VC Across Four Cycles** IOSG founder Jocy shares hard-earned lessons from nine years and over a hundred investments in Web3. The core challenge isn't identifying successful founders, but understanding why talented founders with solid ideas still fail. Through building a "failed founder database," IOSG identified six recurring failure patterns. **Founder Trait Red Flags:** 1. **Emotionally Unstable:** Founders who react defensively to criticism or publicly lash out under pressure (e.g., 80% drawdowns) often fail. Resilience is key. 2. **Lacking Hunger / Having a Fallback:** Founders with significant safety nets (family wealth, cushy fallback jobs) may lack the "do-or-die" commitment needed to survive crypto's brutal cycles. 3. **Unchecked Ego:** Includes "polished execution machines" who excel in known frameworks but struggle when paradigms shift, and "professor-types" who are technically brilliant but resistant to commercial feedback or coaching. **Project Structure Red Flags:** 4. **Token-First, Not Product-First:** Treating the token solely as a fundraising tool with no real utility or connection to product value is a major warning sign. The project should have value even if the token goes to zero. 5. **No Day-1 Exit Thesis:** Founders must have a clear, staged capital strategy from the start, understanding what each funding round needs to prove to unlock the next. "Exit before entry" is crucial. 6. **No Full-Cycle Experience:** Founders who haven't lived through a complete crypto bull/bear cycle (e.g., 2018, 2022) often underestimate their vulnerability. IOSG limits initial checks for such teams to $250k, sizing for risk. **The Positive Flipside: Desirable Founder Traits** The ideal candidate exhibits: obsessive problem-depth, being a second-time founder with a non-consensus vision, strong communication skills with *controlled* ego, relentless perseverance, and a global perspective with agency and taste (increasingly vital in the AI era). **Three Survival Tips for Founders:** 1. **Cash Flow Over Narrative:** Real revenue is what sustains projects, not vanity metrics. 2. **Tokens Are a Liability:** Avoid issuing a token unless absolutely necessary. The hidden costs (market making, liquidity, compliance) are immense, often a multi-million-dollar burden. 3. **Respect Liquidity:** Sell during peaks to build treasury, buy back to support the protocol during troughs. Be realistic about valuations and your ability to deliver for the next round. The final principle is simple yet paramount: **"If it's a borderline 'yes' or 'no,' don't invest."** In an industry that reinvents itself every few years, the discipline to consistently say "no" is the ultimate secret to longevity.

Foresight NewsHace 1 hora(s)

If It's Not a Clear Yes, It's a No: A Nine-Year Retrospective by a VC Who Survived Four Cycles

Foresight NewsHace 1 hora(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片