2026 Crypto Funding Reshuffle: Game and DePIN Are Dead, Prediction Market Duo Takes 18% of All Year's Funding with Two Deals

marsbitPubblicato 2026-05-08Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-05-08

Introduzione

Cryptocurrency Funding in 2026: Gaming & DePIN Falter as Prediction Markets Dominate Data from the first four months of 2026 reveals a stark shift in crypto venture funding. The gaming and DePIN (Decentralized Physical Infrastructure Networks) sectors have seen capital nearly dry up. In contrast, the "Consumer" category, led by two massive deals for prediction market platforms Kalshi ($1B) and Polymarket ($600M), captured a significant share. These two deals alone accounted for 18% of the year's total $8.65 billion raised and exceeded the combined funding of all 47 DeFi projects. Overall, the $8.65B across 305 deals is misleading. A March surge to $4.57B was largely due to two major acquisitions (BVNK at $1.8B and Kalshi). Excluding these, the underlying monthly funding rate is approximately $1B, indicating continued softness. The "Payments" and "Consumer" sectors together consumed 72% of all capital. Another notable trend is the rise of mergers and acquisitions (M&A), with 48 deals nearly matching the 57 seed-round investments. This signals a market pivot from funding new ideas to consolidating around established leaders. The most active investors so far in 2026 are Coinbase Ventures (18 deals), Tether (13 deals), Animoca Brands (11 deals), and GSR (11 deals). Notably, a16z's pace has slowed significantly compared to previous years.

Author:Memento Research

Compiled by: Deep Tide TechFlow

Deep Tide TechFlow Introduction: Crypto funding data for the first four months of 2026 reveals a harsh reality: the Game and DePIN sectors are nearly starved of capital, while Kalshi and Polymarket, two prediction market companies, have taken more money than all DeFi projects combined for the entire year. More alarmingly, the number of M&A deals has already matched seed rounds, indicating a shift in capital from betting on new ideas to acquiring existing leaders.

Funding Overview: March's Surge Was an Illusion

From January 1st to May 6th, 2026, the crypto industry completed 305 funding rounds, totaling $8.65 billion. However, the "surge" to $4.57 billion in March was actually just two massive M&A deals: BVNK's $1.8 billion and Kalshi's $1.0 billion.

Excluding these two deals, the real funding pace is about $1 billion per month, even weaker than at the end of 2025.

Capital Flow: Payments and Consumer Absorb 72%

By sector breakdown:

Payments: $3.74 billion (56 deals)

Consumer: $2.48 billion (35 deals)

DeFi: $1.06 billion (47 deals, the highest number of transactions)

The Payments and Consumer sectors combined account for 72% of the year's total funding. Funding for Game and DePIN has nearly vanished.

Prediction Markets Dominate the Consumer Sector

Two prediction market companies accounted for 18% of the year's total funding:

Kalshi: $1.0 billion

Polymarket: $600 million

These two deals totaling $1.6 billion exceed the sum of all 47 DeFi funding rounds.

M&A Becomes Mainstream

M&A deals reached 48 (accounting for 23% of known-stage transactions), nearly matching the 57 seed rounds (27%). This cycle has shifted from investing in new ideas in early stages to acquiring industry leaders.

Investor Rankings Reshuffled

Most active funds in 2026:

Coinbase Ventures: 18 deals (ranked second during 2021-26 period)

Tether: 13 deals (new top lead investor)

Animoca Brands: 11 deals (ranked first during 2021-26 period)

GSR: 11 deals

a16z: 7 deals (a significant drop compared to ~200 deals during 2021-26 period)

Domande pertinenti

QAccording to the article, which two sectors took the majority of crypto funding in early 2026?

AThe Payments and Consumer sectors took the majority of crypto funding, together accounting for 72% of the total capital raised.

QWhat significant trend does the data reveal about mergers and acquisitions (M&A) compared to seed funding?

AThe data shows that M&A deals reached 48 (23% of known-stage deals), almost catching up to seed rounds at 57 deals (27%). This indicates a shift in the investment cycle from funding new ideas to acquiring established industry leaders.

QWhy was the spike in funding for March 2026 described as an 'illusion'?

AThe spike to $4.57 billion in March was largely an illusion because it was driven by just two mega-deals: an $1.8 billion acquisition of BVNK and a $1 billion deal with Kalshi. Removing these two transactions reveals a slower, more sluggish monthly funding pace of around $1 billion.

QHow did the funding for prediction market companies compare to the total funding for all DeFi projects in the period covered?

AThe two prediction market companies, Kalshi ($1 billion) and Polymarket ($600 million), together raised a combined $1.6 billion. This amount exceeded the total raised by all 47 DeFi projects, which was $1.06 billion.

QWhich investment firms were the most active in terms of deal count during early 2026, and how did this compare to their historical activity?

AIn early 2026, the most active investors by deal count were Coinbase Ventures (18 deals, historically ranked 2nd from 2021-26), Tether (13 deals, new top investor), Animoca Brands (11 deals, historically ranked 1st), GSR (11 deals), and a16z (7 deals, showing a significant decline from its historical ~200 deals between 2021-26).

Letture associate

Bitcoin Miners Are Waving the White Flag, But Their Stocks Are Soaring

Bitcoin miners are capitulating as evidenced by a sustained drop in network hash rate and a record-steep 19.9% decline in mining difficulty, signaling the shuttering of unprofitable machines. However, in a significant divergence from historical patterns, the stocks of publicly traded mining companies have soared, with one major player gaining over 430% in the past year, even as BTC's price fell roughly 46%. This surge is largely attributed to these companies pivoting toward the more lucrative AI narrative. Simultaneously, miners face a structural squeeze. Daily block reward revenue in BTC terms has hit a new all-time low following the latest halving, with current dollar-denominated daily revenue around $30 million compared to a longer-term average of ~$40 million. Fee revenue remains negligible, covering less than one block's subsidy over a 28-day average and accounting for only about ten minutes of the network's daily security budget. This capitulation cycle is unique: miner stress and crypto price weakness have decoupled due to alternative revenue streams (AI), while the long-term reliance on increasing bitcoin prices to offset shrinking subsidies continues, with fee income still far from filling the impending gap.

marsbit5 min fa

Bitcoin Miners Are Waving the White Flag, But Their Stocks Are Soaring

marsbit5 min fa

Will the Fed Definitely Raise Interest Rates in September? How Will Crypto and U.S. Stocks Withstand the Pressure?

The market's expectation for a September Fed rate hike surged dramatically in early August, jumping from under 50% to over 80% within a week. This shift followed a contentious July FOMC meeting, where a 9-3 vote to hold rates revealed growing dissent from hawkish members advocating for an immediate hike to combat persistent inflation. The primary catalyst for this repricing is rising oil prices, driven by renewed geopolitical tensions around the Strait of Hormuz, which threaten global supply. Energy costs directly influence inflation metrics, making the upcoming July CPI report (due August 12th) a critical data point. If it shows inflation reaccelerating, the probability of a September hike will solidify. For Bitcoin and crypto assets, this is typically bearish news. Bitcoin continues to behave as a high-beta, liquidity-sensitive risk asset. A rate hike raises the opportunity cost of holding non-yielding assets and could drive capital toward money markets, pressuring crypto prices in the short term. However, historical patterns suggest that if a hike is perceived as the end of a tightening cycle rather than the start, any negative price impact may be brief. U.S. stocks, particularly crypto-linked equities like Coinbase and growth-oriented tech stocks, are also vulnerable. Higher rates increase discount rates in valuation models, putting pressure on high-multiple companies. This coincides with a pivotal tech earnings season where investor focus has shifted from massive AI capital expenditure to tangible revenue and cash flow generation. Companies with negative cash flow and weak growth narratives could face heightened volatility if borrowing costs rise in September. In summary, a September Fed hike has evolved into a mainstream market scenario. Key factors to watch are oil prices, the July CPI report, and Fed communications, which will determine the final decision and its impact on volatile crypto and equity markets.

marsbit5 min fa

Will the Fed Definitely Raise Interest Rates in September? How Will Crypto and U.S. Stocks Withstand the Pressure?

marsbit5 min fa

A 'Overlooked' Market Event: Joint US-Japan-South Korea Intervention, Rare US Treasury Involvement, and Bessent's Quiet 'Market Rescue'?

Summary: The United States, Japan, and South Korea executed their largest coordinated foreign exchange intervention in nearly 30 years. The action targeted depreciation pressure on the Japanese yen and South Korean won. This move is seen as a significant effort by the US to stabilize the financial markets of its key allies and prevent the spillover of risks. Key details: * Japan reportedly intervened on July 30 using approximately 8.45 trillion yen (about $52.8 billion). South Korean authorities also intervened that day, selling dollars to support the won. * Notably, the US Treasury Department intervened directly in yen markets for the first time in roughly 30 years. The New York Fed, reportedly acting on behalf of the Treasury, sold euros to buy yen via Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley on July 31. Analysts view the use of the euro-yen pair as a way to alleviate yen pressure without adding selling pressure to the US dollar. * Prior to the action, the New York Fed conducted "rate checks" on both USD/JPY and EUR/JPY, a newer signaling tool that falls between verbal and physical intervention. The intervention is interpreted as going beyond traditional currency stabilization. Analysts, such as Michael Hartnett of Bank of America, suggest it resembles a "Price Keeping Operation" for the AI era. The core US objectives are perceived to be: 1. Preventing rapid yen depreciation from triggering a sharp rise in Japanese government bond yields. 2. Containing financial stress from spreading across Asian markets like South Korea and Japan. 3. Reducing the risk of disorderly capital flows impacting the US bond market. This coordinated action underscores the importance of Japan and South Korea as critical partners in the US semiconductor and AI supply chain. Stabilizing their financial markets is seen as vital to mitigating risks to the broader tech industry and the US market itself. The intervention coincides with market pressures, including the KOSDAQ index hitting a low since October 2022. While seen as a move to control volatility, some analysts caution it may not fundamentally reverse existing market trends.

marsbit8 min fa

A 'Overlooked' Market Event: Joint US-Japan-South Korea Intervention, Rare US Treasury Involvement, and Bessent's Quiet 'Market Rescue'?

marsbit8 min fa

Will the Federal Reserve Definitely Raise Interest Rates in September? How Will Cryptocurrencies and US Stocks Bear the Pressure?

In early August 2024, market expectations for a September Federal Reserve rate hike surged dramatically, from below 50% to over 80%, driven by renewed inflation concerns. This shift followed a contentious July FOMC meeting where a 9-3 vote to hold rates revealed a growing hawkish faction advocating for an immediate hike, citing prolonged above-target inflation. The key catalyst is escalating conflict near the Strait of Hormuz, which has pushed oil prices up approximately 20% in July, threatening to reignite inflation. The next critical data point is the July CPI report on August 12th; a hot reading could solidify hike expectations. For crypto assets, particularly Bitcoin, this represents near-term pressure. Bitcoin continues to exhibit high-beta, risk-on characteristics, making it sensitive to tightening liquidity and higher opportunity costs. However, historical precedent suggests that if a hike is perceived as the cycle's end rather than its start, the negative impact may be brief, with markets quickly pivoting to anticipate future rate cuts. U.S. stocks, especially crypto-linked equities like Coinbase and high-valuation tech stocks, face amplified volatility. Higher rates increase discount rates in valuation models, pressuring growth stocks. This coincides with a pivotal tech earnings season where investor focus has shifted from massive AI capital expenditures to demonstrable revenue and cash flow generation. Companies with negative cash flows and weak growth narratives could see severe pressure if a September hike materializes, as financing costs would rise. Key indicators to watch include oil prices, upcoming inflation data, and Fed commentary at events like the Jackson Hole symposium.

Odaily星球日报8 min fa

Will the Federal Reserve Definitely Raise Interest Rates in September? How Will Cryptocurrencies and US Stocks Bear the Pressure?

Odaily星球日报8 min fa

How Likely is it for TradeXYZ to Go Solo from Hyperliquid?

The article analyzes the possibility of TradeXYZ, a dominant project on Hyperliquid's HIP-3 real-world asset (RWA) perpetual contracts market, splitting off to build its own independent trading platform. With TradeXYZ commanding over 90% of HIP-3 volume and over 35% of Hyperliquid's total open interest, its leverage and influence are significant. The primary motive for a split is seen as capturing the underlying protocol fees, of which TradeXYZ currently receives only half. However, several factors strongly discourage such a move. First, replicating Hyperliquid's high-performance infrastructure would be challenging and could degrade TradeXYZ's product quality. Second, Hyperliquid serves as a crucial distribution channel, with most users accessing TradeXYZ's liquidity through its frontend. Third, the close, trusting relationship between the founders of both projects makes a hostile "betrayal" unlikely. The conclusion is that a split would likely result in a lose-lose scenario. Hyperliquid would lose its main growth narrative and see its valuation impacted, while TradeXYZ would face immense technical hurdles, lose its primary user channel, and damage its reputation. Instead of a full separation, the more probable path is for TradeXYZ to negotiate better terms while deepening integration, focusing on enhancing its own brand and user ownership.

marsbit59 min fa

How Likely is it for TradeXYZ to Go Solo from Hyperliquid?

marsbit59 min fa

Trading

Spot