In Just 70 Days, Polymarket Easily Rakes in Tens of Millions in Fees

Odaily星球日报Pubblicato 2026-03-16Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-03-16

Introduzione

Polymarket, a prediction market platform, has generated over $11.2 million in fees in just 70 days since introducing transaction fees on January 6. Initially applied only to "15-minute crypto up/down" markets, the fee structure charges more when odds are near 50% (up to 1.56%) and less when they approach 0% or 100%. By March 6, fees were expanded to all crypto-related markets, which now drive most of the revenue. Weekly fee income has shown consistent growth, reaching $1.84 million in a recent week. If current trading volume and structure continue, Polymarket’s annualized revenue is estimated at $58.4 million under a conservative model. A more aggressive projection—assuming fees are applied to all markets—could yield up to $360 million per year. The platform has also distributed $13.41 million in liquidity provider incentives, which March revenue is on track to cover entirely. Polymarket’s revenue potential hinges on two factors: continued growth in trading volume and further expansion of fee-based markets. The platform has effectively proven the profitability of the prediction market model, positioning it as a highly efficient revenue generator in the crypto ecosystem.

Original | Odaily Planet Daily (@OdailyChina)

Author | Azuma (@azuma_eth)

On January 6th of this year, Polymarket officially ended its "zero-fee" model, beginning a trial implementation of transaction fees starting with the "15-minute cryptocurrency up/down" markets. The specific fee rate varies with the market's real-time odds — the closer the odds are to 0% or 100%, the lower the fee; conversely, the closer the odds are to 50%, the higher the fee, up to a maximum of 1.56%.

Later, on January 28th, about three weeks after the fees were introduced, we published an article titled "Data Estimates Show Polymarket Could Easily Exceed $100 Million in Annual Revenue, Assuming...". The article provided a static estimate based on Polymarket's trading volume and activity structure at the time: in the most conservative scenario, if the scope of fee-charging markets remained unchanged, Polymarket was projected to generate approximately $38 million in annual income; in the most aggressive scenario, if Polymarket extended fees to all markets, it was projected to earn $418 million in annual fee revenue.

When we last estimated Polymarket's revenue, we were hampered by an overly short observation period and too few calculable samples. Now, nearly two months later, we have used richer data to re-estimate Polymarket's revenue expectations. The results show that the so-called "conservative" estimate was indeed too conservative, and the "aggressive" expectation isn't too exaggerated.

Changes in Revenue Data

According to data compiled by Gate Research on Dune, since transaction fees were introduced on January 6th, Polymarket has accumulated over $11.2 million in fee revenue.

Using the most conservative method for another static estimate, assuming the trading volume and activity structure of the relevant markets remain unchanged, Polymarket is projected to generate approximately $58.4 million in annual revenue.

However, this estimation method does not accurately reflect Polymarket's revenue-generating capability.

The reason is that Polymarket's revenue data is clearly in a growth trend — over the past 10 weeks, the platform's weekly fee revenue has been $560,000, $786,000, $633,000, $749,000, $1.08 million, $1.28 million, $1.35 million, $1.29 million, $1.63 million, $1.84 million... showing almost weekly significant growth.

Reasons for Revenue Growth

There are two reasons for the growth in Polymarket's fee revenue. First, Polymarket has expanded the scope of fee-charging markets; second, Polymarket's overall trading volume and the trading volume in fee-charging markets have been growing continuously.

Regarding the scope of fee-charging markets, Polymarket extended the fee mechanism to all cryptocurrency-related markets on March 6th. Additionally, even earlier, it had begun trialing fee collection in sports markets like NCAA and Serie A. However, the former (cryptocurrency-related markets) currently remains the primary source of fee revenue.

Regarding trading volume, the data dashboard compiled by Data Dashboards on Dune shows that Polymarket's weekly overall trading volume and cryptocurrency market volume (the bottom purple bars) have been growing steadily.

Future Revenue Projections

When we last projected Polymarket's revenue, we had to manually extract the trading volume proportion of "15-minute cryptocurrency up/down" related markets within all cryptocurrency-related markets. But now, since Polymarket extended fees to all cryptocurrency-related markets on March 6th, this estimation is much more straightforward. As for NCAA and Serie A, perhaps because the former hasn't entered the "March Madness" official tournament yet, and the latter has relatively low cultural attention in the US, the trading volume scale of these markets is significantly smaller compared to cryptocurrencies, so they are temporarily ignored here.

Taking data from the only full week after March 6th (March 9th-15th), the trading volume of cryptocurrency-related events accounted for 26.7% of the platform's total trading volume that week. In the same week, Polymarket's fee revenue was approximately $1.84 million. Based on this ratio for a static projection, under the current trading volume level and structure, if Polymarket introduces a similar fee model across all markets, it is projected to bring in $360 million in annual revenue for the platform.

The Money Printer is Already Running

It is worth mentioning that, as a key measure for Polymarket to expand liquidity, the platform has so far distributed a total of $13.41 million in subsidies to liquidity providers (LPs). In contrast, if the data for the remainder of March can continue the performance of the first half, the fee revenue generated by Polymarket within this month alone could cover the total expenditure on liquidity subsidies.

Polymarket has largely proven the revenue-generating capability of this new form of prediction markets. Future revenue growth will mainly depend on two variables — how much more trading volume can grow, and whether fees can be further extended to more markets.

If these two variables continue to trend upwards, prediction markets might become the simplest and most direct "money printer" in the cryptocurrency industry.

Domande pertinenti

QWhen did Polymarket start charging transaction fees, and what was the initial market targeted?

APolymarket started charging transaction fees on January 6, beginning with the '15-minute cryptocurrency up/down' markets.

QHow much fee revenue has Polymarket accumulated since it began charging fees?

APolymarket has accumulated over $11.2 million in fee revenue since it started charging transaction fees.

QWhat are the two main reasons for the growth in Polymarket's fee revenue?

AThe two main reasons are the expansion of fee-charging markets to include all crypto-related markets and the continuous growth in overall trading volume, particularly in cryptocurrency markets.

QWhat is the estimated annual revenue for Polymarket if fees are extended to all markets, according to the latest data?

AIf fees are extended to all markets, the estimated annual revenue for Polymarket is approximately $360 million, based on current trading volume and structure.

QHow does Polymarket's fee revenue compare to the subsidies it has provided to liquidity providers (LPs)?

APolymarket has provided a total of $13.41 million in subsidies to LPs. If the revenue trend from the first half of March continues, the fee income for the month alone could cover the total subsidies paid to LPs so far.

Letture associate

As Consensus Accelerates, What Are Young Investors Betting On?

Title: As Consensus Forms Faster, What Are Young Investors Betting On? In the rapid evolution of tech investment, a new generation of young investors is navigating a landscape where AI, robotics, commercial aerospace, and quantum computing are advancing simultaneously. Traditional investment logic based on financial models is giving way to a need for deep technical understanding and the ability to act before industry consensus forms. An analysis of trends from the "WAIC FUTURE TECH" list of young investment leaders reveals key shifts in focus. The first major trend is the movement of AI from the digital screen into the physical world. Investment is shifting from large language models and chatbots towards embodied AI, robotics, AI hardware, and edge computing. While demonstrations generate excitement, the real challenge lies in achieving scalable, reliable, and cost-effective delivery in complex real-world environments like factories and logistics. Success depends not just on algorithms but on the integration of sensors, actuators, and control systems. Second, the competitive focus for large models is moving beyond raw capability toward building an "intelligence flywheel." The goal is to create self-reinforcing systems where user interaction generates data, improving the model, which in turn enhances the user experience and attracts more engagement. Companies that successfully embed AI into workflows to create these closed-loop systems can build lasting value that isn't easily erased by the next model upgrade. Third, facing a potential bottleneck in high-quality human-generated data, investors are looking at new underlying technologies. Reinforcement learning and self-play, as demonstrated by AlphaGo Zero, offer paths for AI to generate its own experience. Scientific foundation models, which aim to build general AI capabilities for fields like life sciences and materials discovery, represent a non-consensus direction that could unlock new frontiers of knowledge and data. Finally, in deep-tech areas like quantum computing, commercial aerospace, and space-based infrastructure, patient capital is essential. These fields have long, uncertain development and validation cycles involving complex engineering, supply chains, and regulations. Investment here requires a long-term view, focusing on foundational team capabilities and the eventual emergence of market demand, even if commercial returns are distant. Collectively, these trends illustrate how young investors are adapting to a new era. They are learning to make earlier, technically-informed judgments, balance hype with real-world viability, and provide the patient capital needed to build the deep-tech foundations of the future.

marsbit28 min fa

As Consensus Accelerates, What Are Young Investors Betting On?

marsbit28 min fa

Unlocking $100 Million in Liquidity? Pump.fun's New Policy Tests the 5-Minute Pump Technique

Foresight News, July 21 – Pump.fun has launched its new "BOOST" mode as the standard launch mechanism for new tokens. The core of BOOST is to address the issue of "dead liquidity." Historically, when a token migrates from its bonding curve to a liquidity pool, roughly 20% of its liquidity becomes permanently locked and unusable, a problem the platform estimates costs over $100 million annually. The new mechanism redirects this 20% of funds, which would have been locked, to instead be used for a 5-minute Time-Weighted Average Price (TWAP) buyback of the token immediately after migration. The purchased tokens are then permanently burned. For example, this means reserving 17.6 SOL for SOL pairs or about $2516 for USDC pairs at migration. This creates a short-term buying pressure and reduces the token's supply. The goal is to improve the immediate post-launch performance of memecoins, potentially increasing trader retention and transaction volume on the platform. However, critics warn this could lower the bar for token launches, encouraging low-quality projects, and that the brief 5-minute buy pressure might lead to sharper price crashes once it ends if followed by large sell-offs.

Foresight News38 min fa

Unlocking $100 Million in Liquidity? Pump.fun's New Policy Tests the 5-Minute Pump Technique

Foresight News38 min fa

What Signals Can Be Read from the Trading Data of India's Largest Asset Manager SBI's IPO?

India's largest asset manager, SBI Funds Management, successfully listed on July 21 with a nearly $10 billion IPO, attracting approximately 42 times subscription. However, the first-day closing price rose only about 6.3%, falling short of the 16% premium anticipated in the grey market. This signals robust demand for core Indian financial assets but also disciplined pricing, indicating the IPO market is selectively open for strong brands with clear growth narratives. The low reported underwriting fees, which led some global banks to reduce participation, highlight a shift in pricing power towards powerful issuers like SBI. Its strong brand, banking parent, and stable cash flows reduced reliance on traditional investment banking sales channels, with local brokers playing a larger role. This fee dynamic may not be replicable for weaker issuers. SBI's performance is seen as a key test for India's IPO pipeline, including potential future large listings like Reliance Jio and NSE. Its success with tempered gains sets a new price anchor: high-quality assets can launch, but excessive valuation premiums are constrained. The true measure of a sustained market reopening will be whether subsequent major offerings can proceed smoothly at reasonable valuations.

marsbit56 min fa

What Signals Can Be Read from the Trading Data of India's Largest Asset Manager SBI's IPO?

marsbit56 min fa

Can Japan Buy Growth with AI? Will the Bond Market Believe It?

Japan's cabinet has introduced the 2026 Basic Policy on Economic and Fiscal Management and Reform, shifting its primary fiscal target. The new framework moves away from the traditional annual primary balance goal and instead prioritizes a stable reduction of the debt-to-GDP ratio. This change is tied to a strategy of increased "responsible proactive fiscal" spending, aiming to boost long-term growth through investments in strategic sectors like AI, semiconductors, energy, and robotics. The government estimates total public and private investment in 62 key technologies could exceed 370 trillion yen by 2040. The market reaction has been mixed and cautious. While equity markets may respond to policy signals, bond markets are focused on fiscal credibility. Concerns center on whether the weakening of the clear primary balance anchor could lead to looser fiscal discipline. If investors doubt that these strategic investments will generate sufficient productivity gains, tax revenue, and nominal growth to outpace rising interest costs, they may demand higher yields on Japanese Government Bonds (JGBs). Recent volatility in the yen and JGB yields, with the 10-year yield briefly reaching 2.9%, reflects this skepticism. The success of this new framework hinges on two factors: whether Japan can achieve a nominal growth rate consistently higher than its long-term interest rates, and whether future budgets demonstrate disciplined control over bond issuance. The government's narrative is that strategic investment is essential to break Japan's cycle of low growth, aging, and labor shortages. However, the bond market will continuously assess the credibility of this plan, pricing the risk that it may represent fiscal expansion rather than a viable growth strategy.

marsbit1 h fa

Can Japan Buy Growth with AI? Will the Bond Market Believe It?

marsbit1 h fa

Misjudged A-Shares: Resilience, Expectations, and Confidence

China's A-share market recently faced selling pressure, especially in tech sectors, initially triggered by a global tech sell-off that began in South Korea. However, the article argues this is a case of "mistaken injury" and highlights the market's underlying resilience. This resilience stems from three main pillars: **1) Tech Sector Fundamentals:** Unlike Korea's market dominated by a few memory chip stocks, China's tech sector is diversified across computing, communications, electronics, and semiconductors, supported by dual narratives of global AI supply chains and domestic substitution. Core areas like optical modules and fiber optics continue to show strong earnings growth. **2) "National Team" Support:** State-backed institutions and large corporations have made significant market purchases and announced buybacks, providing liquidity and signaling confidence. This is seen as a stabilizing policy signal, often associated with market bottoms. **3) Broader Market Pillars:** Other major sectors are showing endogenous recovery momentum. Consumer stocks benefit from stabilizing CPI and signs of sector recovery (e.g., liquor price hikes). Cyclical sectors like aluminum have high earnings, potential price increases due to tight supply, and low valuations. The financial sector offers stable dividends and low valuations. The conclusion is that the sell-off was driven by external contagion, not a collapse in fundamentals. With strong policy support and recovering momentum across key sectors, the A-share market possesses the toughness to regain stability.

marsbit1 h fa

Misjudged A-Shares: Resilience, Expectations, and Confidence

marsbit1 h fa

Trading

Spot