Polymarket acquires Brahma to fix ‘liquidity imbalance’: Report

ambcryptoPubblicato 2026-03-19Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-03-19

Introduzione

Polymarket has acquired crypto infrastructure firm Brahma to address liquidity imbalances and improve its on-chain trading systems. While popular markets like elections attract significant activity, niche markets suffer from low participation and unreliable pricing. The acquisition aims to distribute liquidity more evenly and enhance platform efficiency. Despite rapid growth and a valuation of $18–20 billion, driven by the 2024 election cycle, Polymarket faces inconsistent trading activity and a recent drop in market share. Competitor Kalshi, a regulated non-crypto platform, briefly captured 66% market share during the election. Polymarket continues to focus on crypto, with plans for a native token, contrasting with Kalshi’s traditional approach.

In a surprising shift, Polymarket has moved beyond simply hosting bets on future events and is now working to build the full infrastructure behind those wagers.

According to reports, Polymarket has acquired Brahma, a company specializing in crypto and DeFi infrastructure. This means Polymarket wants better technology to make its platform faster, smoother, and more on-chain.

Polymarket has grown rapidly, now valued at an estimated $18–20 billion, boosted by heavy activity during the 2024 elections. Yet with that growth come new challenges.

What is Polymarket trying to revamp with Brahma?

One of the core problems is liquidity imbalance. This means popular wagers, like elections or major sports events, attract a lot of money and activity.

Whereas, smaller or niche wagers struggle because not enough people are betting on them. That makes prices less reliable and the markets less useful.

Citing examples, Fortune added,

Larger event contracts, like those in sports or politics, easily bring lots of money into the pool. But smaller wagers focused on niche areas such as, for instance, the outcome of a bowling match in Spain, struggle to amass a sizable amount of liquidity.

Therefore, by acquiring Brahma, Polymarket is trying to fix this by improving how liquidity is distributed across markets. The plan also focuses on making trading more efficient and strengthening its blockchain-based system.

Remarking on this initiative, Shayne Coplan, founder and CEO of Polymarket, told Fortune,

Building reliable infrastructure across blockchain networks and traditional financial rails is hard—there are no shortcuts.

That said, Brahma, founded in 2021, has already processed over $1 billion in transactions, and by bringing its team in-house, Polymarket is effectively shutting down Brahma’s external operations to focus entirely on its growth.

Polymarket’s metrics paint a confusing picture

However, the platform’s internal data suggests that growth is not entirely balanced. While more capital is flowing into the system, as seen in the steady rise in Open Interest, actual trading activity remains inconsistent.

Source: Dune

This gap shows that users place long-term bets but trade inconsistently, resulting in low liquidity and one-sided markets.

Even though the platform became very popular during the 2024 election cycle, its dominance didn’t last. Its market share dropped sharply from over 61% to around 32% as the hype faded. However, at press time, Polymarket’s stock price stood at $141.60, marking a more than 20% increase year-to-date.

Is Polymarket losing ground against Kalshi?

In fact, during the 2024 election, its U.S.-based competitor Kalshi took advantage of the slowdown, briefly capturing about 66% market share and handling nearly $1 billion in weekly trading volume.

This competition reflects two very different paths. Kalshi follows a fully regulated approach with no blockchain, DeFi, or token layer.

Polymarket, in contrast, is doubling down on crypto. Besides Brahma, the platform’s CEO is also hinting at a potential POLY token. With a possible 2026 launch, it acts as a strong incentive for users, something regulated platforms like Kalshi are struggling to offer.


Final Summary

  • The Brahma acquisition shows that fixing liquidity and market efficiency is now more important than just attracting users.
  • Competition from regulated players like Kalshi adds pressure, especially as they gain ground during periods of low hype.

Domande pertinenti

QWhat is the primary reason Polymarket acquired Brahma, according to the report?

APolymarket acquired Brahma to fix the 'liquidity imbalance' on its platform by improving how liquidity is distributed across markets, making trading more efficient, and strengthening its blockchain-based system.

QWhat specific problem does the 'liquidity imbalance' cause for smaller wagers on Polymarket?

ASmaller or niche wagers struggle to attract enough betting activity, which makes their prices less reliable and the markets less useful due to low liquidity.

QHow did Polymarket's market share change after the hype of the 2024 election cycle faded?

APolymarket's market share dropped sharply from over 61% to around 32% after the hype of the 2024 election cycle faded.

QWhich competitor briefly captured about 66% market share during Polymarket's slowdown, and what is its key operational difference?

AKalshi, Polymarket's U.S.-based competitor, briefly captured about 66% market share. Its key difference is that it follows a fully regulated approach with no blockchain, DeFi, or token layer.

QWhat potential incentive is Polymarket's CEO hinting at to attract users, and how does it contrast with regulated platforms?

APolymarket's CEO is hinting at a potential POLY token, which acts as a strong incentive for users. This is something regulated platforms like Kalshi struggle to offer.

Letture associate

7 Months After the Collapse of Huiwang, Southeast Asia's Escrow Platforms Undergo a Major Reshuffle

Following the collapse of Huione Pay—dubbed the "Alipay of Southeast Asia"—seven months ago, the region's underground financial guarantee platform sector is undergoing a significant reshuffle. This power vacuum has been swiftly filled by emerging platforms such as XinBi, Tiger/Navigator, JinBei (renamed JinBo), Dali/Tiancheng, and FullyLight. These platforms, operating largely via Telegram and offering services like escrow for illicit transactions, have absorbed the vast user base and markets left behind by Huione. While positioning themselves as "trust intermediaries," their primary clientele consists of networks involved in online scams, money laundering, illegal gambling, and even human trafficking. For instance, the Tiger/Navigator platform explicitly provides "escrow" services for kidnapping-for-ransom operations ("强押车交易"). Data underscores the immense scale: Huione alone processed over $103 billion in cryptocurrency payments and facilitated over $31 billion through its escrow market before its downfall, linking it to Cambodia's notorious Prince Group. Since its collapse, competitors have seen explosive growth. For example, the XinBi platform has accumulated over $1.6 billion in total USDT revenue, while platforms like NewPay, OkPay (under Dali), and FullyLight Wallet collectively processed over $4.8 billion in USDT in a single year. This ecosystem thrives in regions like Cambodia and Myanmar, where regulatory gaps allow these platforms to act as critical financial infrastructure for sprawling cybercrime industries, from scam compounds to online casinos. The article concludes that the moniker "Southeast Asian Alipay" is a misnomer, obscuring the platforms' fundamental role in enabling serious criminal enterprises rather than representing legitimate financial innovation.

Odaily星球日报42 min fa

7 Months After the Collapse of Huiwang, Southeast Asia's Escrow Platforms Undergo a Major Reshuffle

Odaily星球日报42 min fa

The Changing Landscape: What Are Crypto VCs Experiencing?

Title: The Shifting Landscape of Crypto Venture Capital The era of dedicated crypto venture capital funds is undergoing a significant transformation. Once essential for navigating the sector's complexity and high risk, these specialized funds are now facing an identity crisis as the market matures. This shift mirrors historical patterns in other specialized investment classes like cleantech and SPACs, where initial information advantages dissipate as technologies become mainstream and integrated into existing industry frameworks. The article argues that crypto is reaching a critical inflection point, transitioning from a "building phase" to an "integration phase." Major players like Stripe, BlackRock, and Visa now engage with crypto not for its novel mechanics but as a foundational financial infrastructure. Their needs—regulatory compliance, banking partnerships, distribution channels—align with traditional fintech, a domain easily understood by large, generalist funds like Sequoia and Founders Fund. This evolution creates a "barbell effect" within the VC landscape. On one end are massive, diversified platforms that can incorporate crypto as one vertical among many. On the other are small, nimble funds focused on niche, experimental projects. The middle ground—medium-sized dedicated crypto funds—is being squeezed out. Their typical fund size makes it impossible to generate sufficient returns solely from early-stage crypto bets, yet they cannot compete with giants for later-stage deals. Consequently, leading crypto-native firms like Paradigm and Framework Ventures are expanding into AI, robotics, and other sectors, driven partly by LP pressure for better returns amid a broader VC DPI crisis. Others, like Dragonfly and a16z, have narrowed their crypto focus predominantly to financial infrastructure like stablecoins, reframing the sector's core narrative. For crypto entrepreneurs, this consolidation presents challenges. While generalist funds offer larger checks and broader resources, crypto projects now compete fiercely with AI for attention and capital within these firms. Furthermore, the long-term, non-commercial foundational work that built the ecosystem—funded by dedicated crypto VCs—is less likely to attract generalist capital focused on direct returns. The conclusion is that "crypto investor" as a standalone category is becoming obsolete, akin to "internet investor." Crypto is becoming a baseline infrastructure layer. The future will see a barbell structure: large-scale growth financing handled by generalist funds, while pioneering, speculative projects are funded by small, specialized vehicles. The dedicated crypto funds of the 2017-2021 boom, which incubated core infrastructure, are giving way to this new, bifurcated reality.

Foresight News59 min fa

The Changing Landscape: What Are Crypto VCs Experiencing?

Foresight News59 min fa

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.

marsbit1 h fa

As Consensus Accelerates, What Are Young Investors Betting On?

marsbit1 h fa

Trading

Spot
活动图片