Institutional Adoption of Prediction Markets Stuck at the Third Stage

marsbitОпубліковано о 2026-04-17Востаннє оновлено о 2026-04-17

Анотація

Prediction markets are transitioning from niche platforms focused on elections and sports to mainstream financial tools, as highlighted at Kalshi Research's inaugural conference. While sports still dominate trading volume (around 80%), non-sports categories like macroeconomics, politics, and entertainment are growing faster, signaling a shift from entertainment-based trading to information and risk management tools. Institutions, including Wall Street firms, are increasingly using prediction markets for data reference (Stage 1 adoption), with some progressing to system integration (Stage 2). However, full-scale trading (Stage 3) is limited due to the lack of margin trading, requiring full collateral for positions—a barrier for leverage-dependent entities. Kalshi is working with regulators to introduce margin mechanisms. Key insights from participants like Goldman Sachs and CNBC emphasize the value of real-time pricing for events (e.g., Fed decisions, tariffs), providing benchmarks previously unavailable. The path to maturity mirrors historical financial instruments like options, with expectations that prediction markets will become institutional staples within five years. Political leaders, including Trump and Schumer, now cite Kalshi odds, underscoring its growing influence. The platform rewards domain expertise over traditional finance backgrounds, attracting diverse participants from fields like music and poker. Ultimately, prediction markets are evolving into critical i...

Original Title:Prediction Markets: They Grow Up So Fast, Author: Alex Immerman(@aleximm)

Compiled | Odaily Planet Daily(@OdailyChina); Translator | Asher(@Asher_ 0210)

Editor's Note: At the end of March this year, prediction markets, once considered a niche area, reached a critical moment. Kalshi Research, the research arm of Kalshi, hosted its inaugural research conference in New York, bringing together academics, Wall Street executives, former politicians, and frontline traders. The composition of attendees sent a clear signal—prediction markets are moving from the fringe to the mainstream.

The conference opened with a dialogue between Kalshi co-founders Tarek Mansour and Luana Lopes Lara, moderated by Bloomberg reporter Katherine Doherty. This article excerpts and summarizes key insights from the conference.

Prediction Markets Are More Than Just Elections and Sports

For a long time, prediction markets have been defined by certain "highlight moments"—U.S. elections, the Super Bowl, March Madness. These events dominate news cycles and naturally consume most of the trading volume, leading outsiders to mistakenly believe that prediction markets' value stops there.

But this impression is being shattered. Just as the conference was held, weekly trading volume for sports predictions had nearly reached $3 billion, accounting for about 80% of Kalshi's total trading volume. While this seems dominant, it hides a more critical trend: sports' share is actually at a historical low.

In other words, all other categories are growing faster. Entertainment, crypto, politics, culture, and other areas are driving stronger user growth and more stable retention. Sports act more like an entry product—they are intuitive, emotionally driven, and have clear rhythms, making them suitable for attracting mass participation. Meanwhile, long-tail markets, which account for over 20% of total trading volume, are growing rapidly. These markets will play an important role in institutional hedging and information pricing in the future.

This is also confirmed on the institutional side. Cyril Goddeeris, Global Co-Head of Equity Business at Goldman Sachs, stated that predictions related to macro events and CPI are the categories Wall Street is most focused on currently; Sally Shin, Head of Growth Platforms at CNBC, mentioned that she already uses predictions related to the Fed Chair and non-farm payroll data as narrative tools; Troy Dixon, Global Co-Head of Markets at Tradeweb, envisioned a future where large investment banks will establish dedicated prediction market trading desks, with financial contracts as core products.

Prediction markets are shifting from "recreational trading" to "information and risk tools."

Why Kalshi Has Attracted Wall Street's Attention

Traditional financial markets operate efficiently largely because various assets have recognized benchmarks—the S&P 500 represents the average performance of 500 stocks, and crude oil has the ICE benchmark price. But for political and economic events (such as who will win an election, whether a certain tariff will pass, or the outcome of a Supreme Court case), there was almost no widely accepted, dynamically updated "benchmark" before.

Prediction markets change this. Now, almost any future event can have a real-time, liquid price benchmark. When the market can provide credible pricing for "the probability of a 30% tariff passing," institutions can trade around this price or hedge other risks in their portfolios. This makes the event itself a directly tradable object.

As Tradeweb's Troy Dixon said: "If you go back to when Trump was first elected, many people were hedging in the stock market, such as shorting the S&P, because they thought his election would cause the market to fall. But this was the wrong trade. The question is, how should these events be priced? Where is the benchmark?"

Tarek also mentioned that one motivation for founding Kalshi came from his previous work at Goldman Sachs, where he provided trading advice around the 2024 election and Brexit. Without prediction markets, when institutions hedge political or macro events through related assets, they actually need to make two layers of judgment—they must judge both the outcome of the event itself and the relationship between the event and the traded asset, with the latter carrying a separate risk of failure.

When the event itself has a direct price benchmark, the originally dispersed dual risks are merged into a single judgment. As Tarek said, the market has already begun pricing various events.

The Three Stages Toward Institutional Adoption

It is still too early to say that Wall Street institutions are participating in Kalshi trading on a large scale. Currently, most institutions use it primarily for data reference rather than actual trading.

However, Luana pointed out that the path to institutional adoption is already clear and can be divided into three stages:

  • The first stage is data access: Integrating prediction market prices into institutions' daily workflows, such as having Goldman Sachs investment managers view Kalshi odds like they view the VIX index. This stage has already been achieved to some extent. Jonathan Wright, a professor at Johns Hopkins University and former Fed official, stated that for Fed decisions, unemployment rates, and GDP, Kalshi is almost the only reference source;
  • The second stage is system integration: Including compliance approval, legal confirmation, technical access, and internal education, i.e., incorporating prediction markets into the usable financial tool system;
  • The third stage is actual trading: Institutions begin hedging risks on the platform, trading volume and liquidity gradually accumulate, forming a positive feedback loop. More hedgers attract more speculators, tighter spreads attract more hedgers, and benchmark prices continuously strengthen.

Currently, most institutions are still in the first stage, some have entered the second stage, and only a few have reached the third stage.

A major obstacle preventing institutions from entering the third stage is that current prediction market trading requires full margin—a $100 position requires depositing $100. This is acceptable for retail investors but is a significant limitation for hedge funds or banks that rely on leverage and capital efficiency. As Tarek said, if you want to hedge $100, you must put in $100, which is too costly for institutions; firms like Citadel or Millennium won't adopt this method. Kalshi has already received permission from the National Futures Association and is working with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to introduce margin trading mechanisms.

What Happens Next?

Michael McDonough, Head of Market Innovation at Bloomberg, gave the most direct judgment: The sign of success is when these things become boring. He compared prediction markets to the options market in the 1970s, which also faced controversies over manipulation and regulatory uncertainty, but these issues were eventually resolved, evolving into an almost taken-for-granted infrastructure.

Toby Moskowitz, Partner at AQR, stated that he is willing to bet on the development of prediction markets. Within five years, or even sooner, it will become a viable tool at the institutional level.

Garrett Herren of Vote Hub described the final form: The question is no longer whether to use prediction markets, but how to use them. Once the discussion shifts to this level, it means they have become indispensable. In fact, although prediction markets are still relatively small, the hedging market itself is extremely large.

The normalization of prediction markets is already happening.

In discussions of political issues, former Congressman Mondaire Jones mentioned that senior figures from both parties, including Trump, House Minority Leader Jeffries, and Senate Minority Leader Schumer, have begun publicly citing Kalshi odds. Scott Tranter of DDHQ also confirmed that prediction market data has now become an important input for intra-party decision-making. Meanwhile, Vote Hub announced that it has directly integrated Kalshi data into its midterm election prediction model.

All of this barely existed two years ago. Back then, the most successful traders on Kalshi were still seen as amateurs. But now, the situation has changed, and it's even hard to define them with that term anymore.

In a roundtable, four traders shared their paths—one spent eleven years studying the Billboard charts, another has been participating in prediction markets since 2006—when it was still a cashless, somewhat geeky interest area. They did not come from the finance industry but from backgrounds in music, politics, and poker. But they agreed that the platform truly rewards deep domain knowledge, not resumes.

Summary

Prediction markets have come a long way. They were once seen as academic experiments, later became brief highlights during election cycles, and were also viewed as an extension of sports betting.

The message from this conference is clear: Prediction markets are gradually evolving into an infrastructure for pricing uncertainty, serving a wide range of participants from retail investors to large institutions and diverse application scenarios.

Пов'язані питання

QWhat are the three stages of institutional adoption of prediction markets as described in the article?

AThe three stages are: 1) Data Access - integrating prediction market prices into daily workflows; 2) System Integration - involving compliance approval, legal confirmation, technical access, and internal education; 3) Actual Trading - where institutions begin hedging risk on the platform, with trading volume and liquidity building up.

QWhat is identified as a major barrier preventing institutions from reaching the third stage of adoption on Kalshi?

AThe requirement for full margin trading, where a $100 position requires depositing $100, is a major barrier. This is cost-prohibitive and inefficient for hedge funds and banks that rely on leverage.

QAccording to the article, what significant shift is occurring in the perception of prediction markets' primary value?

APrediction markets are shifting from being seen as 'entertainment trading' towards becoming 'information and risk tools' for institutions, moving beyond just elections and sports.

QHow did the composition of the attendees at Kalshi Research's conference signal a change for prediction markets?

AThe presence of academia, Wall Street executives, former politicians, and frontline traders signaled that prediction markets are moving from a niche interest into the mainstream.

QWhat historical financial market does Michael McDonough compare the current state of prediction markets to, and what does he say is the marker of success?

AHe compares it to the options market of the 1970s. He states that the marker of success is when these tools become 'boring' and evolve into a fundamental, taken-for-granted infrastructure.

Пов'язані матеріали

Borrowing Money from a Hundred Years Later, Building Incomprehensible AI

Tech giants like Alphabet, Amazon, Meta, and Microsoft are undergoing a radical financial transformation due to AI. Their traditional "light-asset, high-free-cash-flow" model is being dismantled by staggering capital expenditures on AI infrastructure—data centers, GPUs, and power. Combined 2026 guidance exceeds $700 billion, a 4.5x increase from 2022, causing free cash flow to plummet (e.g., Amazon's fell 95%). To fund this, they are borrowing unprecedented sums through long-dated, multi-currency bonds (e.g., Alphabet's 100-year bond). The world's most conservative capital—pensions, insurers—is now funding Silicon Valley's most speculative bet. This shift makes these companies resemble heavy-asset industrials (railroads, utilities) rather than software firms, threatening their premium valuations. Historically, such infrastructure booms (railroads, fiber optics) followed a pattern: genuine technology, overbuilding fueled by competitive frenzy, aggressive debt financing, and a crash triggered by financial conditions—not technology failure. The infrastructure remained, but many original builders and financiers did not survive. The core gamble is a "time arbitrage": using cheap debt today to build scale and lock in customers before AI capabilities commoditize. They are betting that AI revenue will materialize before debt comes due. Their positions vary: Amazon is under immediate cash pressure; Meta's path to monetization is unclear; Alphabet has a robust core business buffer; Microsoft has the shortest path from infrastructure to revenue. The contract is set: the most risk-averse global capital has lent its time to Silicon Valley, awaiting a future that is promised but uncertain.

marsbit9 хв тому

Borrowing Money from a Hundred Years Later, Building Incomprehensible AI

marsbit9 хв тому

The 'VVV' Concept Soars 9x in Half a Year, The New AI Narrative on Base Chain

"The article explores the 'VVV' concept as the new AI-focused narrative within the Base ecosystem, centered around the token $VVV of the privacy-focused, uncensored generative AI platform Venice, led by crypto veteran Erik Voorhees. Venice has seen significant growth in 2026, with its API users surging, partly attributed to exposure from OpenClaw. The platform now boasts over 2 million total users and 55,000 paid subscribers. Correspondingly, the $VVV token price has risen over 9x this year. Key to its performance are tokenomics designed for value accrual: reduced annual emissions, subscription revenue used for buyback-and-burn, and a unique staking mechanism. Staking $VVV yields $sVVV, which can be used to mint $DIEM tokens. Each staked $DIEM provides a daily $1 credit for using Venice's API services, creating tangible utility. The article also highlights other tokens associated with the 'VVV' narrative. $POD, the token of distributed AI network Dolphin (which co-developed Venice's default AI model), saw a massive price surge. $cyb3rwr3n, a project for a Venice credit auction market, gained attention due to perceived connections to Venice's team despite official denials. Finally, $SR of robotics platform STRIKEROBOT.AI rose after announcing a partnership with Venice for robot vision-language model development. Overall, the 'VVV' ecosystem combines AI platform growth, deflationary tokenomics, and innovative utility mechanisms, driving significant investor interest and price action in related tokens."

marsbit18 хв тому

The 'VVV' Concept Soars 9x in Half a Year, The New AI Narrative on Base Chain

marsbit18 хв тому

Anthropic and OpenAI Have Single-Handedly Severed the Logic of Pre-IPO Stock Tokenization

The pre-IPO stock token market is experiencing significant turmoil following strong statements from AI giants Anthropic and OpenAI. Both companies have updated their official policies, declaring that any transfer of their company shares—including sales, transfers, or assignments of share interests—without prior board approval is "invalid" and will not be recognized in their corporate records. This means buyers in such unauthorized transactions would not be recognized as shareholders and would have no shareholder rights. A major point of contention is the use of Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs), which are legal entities commonly used by pre-IPO token platforms to pool investor funds and indirectly acquire shares from employees or early investors. The companies explicitly state they do not permit SPVs to acquire their shares, and any such transfer violates their restrictions. They warn that third parties selling shares through SPVs, direct sales, forward contracts, or stock tokens are likely engaged in fraud or are offering worthless investments due to these transfer limits. This stance directly threatens the core model of many pre-IPO token platforms, which rely on SPV structures. The announcement revealed additional risks within this model, such as complex "SPV-within-SPV" layering that obscures legal transparency, increases management fees, and creates a chain reaction risk of invalidation. Following the news, tokens like ANTHROPIC and OPENAI on platforms like PreStocks fell sharply (over 20%). The market reaction highlights a divergence: while asset-backed pre-IPO tokens plummeted, purely speculative pre-IPO futures contracts, which are bilateral bets on future IPO prices with no claim to actual shares, remained relatively stable as they are unaffected by the transfer restrictions. The industry is split on the implications. Some believe the fundamental logic of pre-IPO token trading is broken if leading companies reject SPV-held shares, potentially causing a domino effect. Others, like Rivet founder Nick Abouzeid, argue that buyers of such unofficial tokens always knowingly accepted the risk of non-recognition by the company. The statements serve as a stark risk warning and a corrective measure for a market where valuations for some AI-related pre-IPO tokens had soared to irrational levels, far exceeding recent funding round valuations.

marsbit1 год тому

Anthropic and OpenAI Have Single-Handedly Severed the Logic of Pre-IPO Stock Tokenization

marsbit1 год тому

Anthropic and OpenAI Personally Sever the Logic of Pre-IPO Crypto-Stocks

The pre-IPO token market has been rocked by strong statements from Anthropic and OpenAI. Both AI giants have updated official warnings, declaring that any sale or transfer of their company shares without explicit board approval is "invalid" and will not be recognized on their corporate records. This directly targets Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs), the common legal structure used by pre-IPO token platforms. These platforms typically use an SPV to acquire shares from employees or early investors, then issue blockchain-based tokens representing a claim on the SPV's economic benefits. Anthropic and OpenAI's position means that if an SPV's share purchase lacked authorization, the underlying asset could be deemed worthless, nullifying the token's value. Anthropic explicitly warned that any third party selling its shares—via direct sales, forwards, or tokens—is likely fraudulent or offering a valueless investment. The crackdown highlights risks in the popular SPV model, including complex multi-layered "Russian doll" SPV structures that obscure legal ownership, add fees, and concentrate risk. If one layer is invalidated, the entire chain could collapse. Following the announcements, tokens like ANTHROPIC and OPENAI on platforms like PreStocks fell sharply (over 20%). In contrast, purely speculative pre-IPO prediction contracts remained stable, as they involve no actual share ownership. The move is seen as a corrective measure amid a market frenzy where some pre-IPO token valuations (e.g., Anthropic's token hitting a $1.4 trillion implied valuation) far exceeded recent official funding rounds. Opinions are split: some believe this undermines the core logic of pre-IPO token trading if top companies reject SPVs, while others argue buyers always assumed this legal risk when accessing unofficial channels. The statements serve as a stark warning and a potential catalyst for market de-leveraging and clearer boundaries.

Odaily星球日报1 год тому

Anthropic and OpenAI Personally Sever the Logic of Pre-IPO Crypto-Stocks

Odaily星球日报1 год тому

The Waged Worker Driven to Poverty by AI Subscriptions

"AI Membership: The Hidden Cost Pushing Workers Toward 'Poverty'" The widespread corporate push for AI adoption is creating a hidden financial burden for employees. Companies, from giants like Alibaba to small firms, are mandating AI use, often tying token consumption to KPIs, but frequently refuse to cover the costs. Workers are forced to pay for subscriptions out of pocket to stay competitive and avoid being replaced. Front-end developer Long Shen spends up to 2000 RMB monthly on tools like Cursor and ChatGPT Plus, seeing it as a necessary 3% salary investment to handle 90% of his coding tasks. While it boosted his performance and led to promotions, he now faces idle time at work, pretending to be busy. Designer Peng Peng navigates strict company firewalls by using personal devices and accounts for AI image generation tools like Midjourney, spending hundreds monthly without reimbursement, while her boss demands faster, more numerous revisions. The pressure creates workplace anxiety and suspicion. Programmer Li Huahua, after a friend's experience of raised KPIs following AI success, fears being branded a "traitor" for using it yet worries about falling behind if she doesn't. The dynamic allows management to demand results without understanding the tools or covering expenses, treating employees like AI "agents." While some, like entrepreneur Jin Tu, find high value in paid AI, building entire systems and winning competitions, for most, it's a trap. Free tools like Kimi and Doubao are introducing fees, closing off alternatives. The initial efficiency gains individual advantage, but as AI becomes ubiquitous, the personal edge disappears, workloads increase, and a cycle of dependency begins. Workers like Long Shen realize they cannot maintain AI-generated code without AI, making stopping harder than continuing to pay. The tool promising liberation is instead becoming a compulsory, costly chain in the modern workplace.

marsbit2 год тому

The Waged Worker Driven to Poverty by AI Subscriptions

marsbit2 год тому

Торгівля

Спот
Ф'ючерси
活动图片