Nasdaq Ventures into Prediction Markets: Wall Street Bets on Tech Index with 'Yes or No'

Odaily星球日报Опубліковано о 2026-03-03Востаннє оновлено о 2026-03-03

Анотація

Nasdaq has filed a proposal with the SEC to launch binary options, or "outcome-related options," on its flagship Nasdaq-100 and Nasdaq-100 Micro indexes. These contracts allow investors to make "yes or no" predictions on whether specific conditions will be met by the index at expiration. Priced between $0.01 and $1.00, the contract value reflects the perceived probability of the outcome—settling at $1 if true and $0 if false. This simplifies trading to a direct bet on event outcomes, rather than price movements. The Nasdaq-100, heavily weighted toward major tech stocks like Apple and Nvidia, is highly sensitive to market sentiment, making it an ideal underlying asset for such products. This move signals traditional exchanges' growing interest in prediction markets. Unlike the Intercontinental Exchange's recent strategic investment in Polymarket, Nasdaq is directly integrating predictive structures into its existing product lineup. If approved, this would mark a significant step in bringing prediction-based trading into the regulated mainstream financial system, blending traditional derivatives with event-driven speculation.

Original | Odaily Planet Daily (@OdailyChina)

Author | Asher (@Asher_ 0210)

Last night, Nasdaq Inc. submitted a rule change proposal to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), planning to introduce an options contract that allows investors to make "yes or no" judgments on major stock indices.

According to the document, Nasdaq intends to list "binary options," also known as "outcome-related options," on its flagship products—the Nasdaq 100 Index and the Nasdaq 100 Micro Index. If approved, this would mark Nasdaq's first official foray into products with prediction market attributes.

This move signifies that traditional stock exchange giants are actively entering the rapidly growing prediction market sector.

What Are Binary Options?

The proposed contracts have a pricing range of 1 cent to 1 dollar, with the price itself directly reflecting the market's judgment of the probability of a specific outcome.

For example, if a contract is based on whether "the Nasdaq 100 Index meets a certain condition at a specific time point," then:

  • If the market believes the probability of this outcome is 80%, the price might be close to $0.80;
  • If the condition is met at expiration, the contract settles at $1;
  • If the condition is not met, the contract value becomes zero.

If traditional options are about betting on "how much it will rise or fall," binary options are more concerned with "whether it will happen." There are no complex parameters, no interval calculations—only the outcome itself. This all-or-nothing settlement method makes trading more like making a clear judgment about the future.

Because of this, such products are closer in form to the logic of prediction markets.

Why Choose the Nasdaq 100?

Nasdaq's choice is not an ordinary index but one of the most sentiment-sensitive assets. The Nasdaq 100 has long been regarded as a core indicator of the U.S. technology sector, with concentrated holdings in heavyweight companies like Apple, NVIDIA, Microsoft, Amazon, and Meta. These companies almost always become market focal points each quarter. An earnings report, a regulatory update, or even a policy statement can quickly reflect in the index's movement.

The high concentration of components means that the Nasdaq 100's trends often revolve around a single focus. The market might bet on AI expectations for a period, then shift to interest rate paths or policy changes. During earnings or policy-intensive periods, the index typically reflects market judgments in a relatively short time rather than prolonged back-and-forth fluctuations.

Additionally, the Nasdaq 100 itself has a mature derivatives trading foundation, ample liquidity, and a well-established pricing system. Introducing new structured products on this underlying asset is risk-controllable and more likely to gain market acceptance.

Two Ways Traditional Exchanges Are Entering the Market

Nasdaq is not the first traditional exchange to show interest in prediction markets. In October 2025, Intercontinental Exchange, the parent company of the New York Stock Exchange, announced a strategic investment of approximately $2 billion in Polymarket, acquiring about a 20% stake, with the transaction valuation once reaching around $8 billion.

The NYSE's choice was not to launch its own prediction products but to enter the field through capital participation and data cooperation. Its core intention is to obtain real-time probability data formed by prediction markets and incorporate it into institutional service systems. For the NYSE, prediction markets are more like supplementary sentiment indicators and data assets.

In contrast, Nasdaq's approach is more direct. It chooses to embed binary structures into its core index product line, extending within the existing trading framework. Compared to investing in external prediction market platforms, this method means predictive trading is incorporated into the standardized securities product system, rather than being just an external data source.

The difference in strategies reflects the varying judgments of traditional exchanges when facing new trading structures.

Prediction Markets Are Being Integrated into Traditional Exchange Product Systems

Regardless of whether the SEC ultimately approves this proposal, Nasdaq's submission of the rule change application itself sends a clear signal—predictive trading is no longer just an experiment on crypto platforms or niche markets but is beginning to be integrated into traditional exchange product systems.

For a long time, mainstream derivatives have revolved around price fluctuations, with investors judging the magnitude and timing of rises and falls through different structures. Binary options simplify the question to whether the outcome will occur, shifting the trading focus from magnitude to the conclusion itself.

When the Nasdaq 100 Index is incorporated into such contract structures, the trading logic becomes more direct. The market's focus is no longer on the magnitude of fluctuations but on whether a specific outcome will materialize. The price reflects not just volatility but the consensus on the probability of the outcome.

For Nasdaq, this is an extension of its product line. For prediction market, it is the beginning of its structure being formally accepted by the mainstream system. If this product eventually launches, it could become a bridging attempt between traditional derivatives and event-based trading.

Пов'язані питання

QWhat is the new type of option contract that Nasdaq has proposed to the SEC?

ANasdaq has proposed a 'binary option' or 'outcome-related option' contract that allows investors to make 'yes or no' judgments on major stock indices.

QWhich specific indices will the new binary options be based on if approved?

AThe binary options will be based on the Nasdaq 100 Index and the Nasdaq 100 Micro Index.

QHow does the pricing of these binary options reflect market expectations?

AThe price, ranging from 1 cent to 1 dollar, directly reflects the market's judgment of the probability of a specific outcome. For example, a price of $0.80 indicates an 80% probability that the condition will be met.

QWhat is the key difference between traditional options and these new binary options?

ATraditional options focus on 'how much' the price will move, while binary options focus on 'whether' a specific outcome will happen, with a simple all-or-nothing settlement.

QHow does Nasdaq's approach to entering the prediction market differ from that of the New York Stock Exchange's parent company?

ANasdaq is directly integrating binary structures into its core index products, while NYSE's parent, Intercontinental Exchange, made a strategic investment in an external prediction market platform, Polymarket, to gain access to real-time probability data.

Пов'язані матеріали

a16z: AI's 'Amnesia', Can Continuous Learning Cure It?

The article "a16z: AI's 'Amnesia' – Can Continual Learning Cure It?" explores the limitations of current large language models (LLMs), which, like the protagonist in the film *Memento*, are trapped in a perpetual present—unable to form new memories after training. While methods like in-context learning (ICL), retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), and external scaffolding (e.g., chat history, prompts) provide temporary solutions, they fail to enable true internalization of new knowledge. The authors argue that compression—the core of learning during training—is halted at deployment, preventing models from generalizing, discovering novel solutions (e.g., mathematical proofs), or handling adversarial scenarios. The piece introduces *continual learning* as a critical research direction to address this, categorizing approaches into three paths: 1. **Context**: Scaling external memory via longer context windows, multi-agent systems, and smarter retrieval. 2. **Modules**: Using pluggable adapters or external memory layers for specialization without full retraining. 3. **Weights**: Enabling parameter updates through sparse training, test-time training, meta-learning, distillation, and reinforcement learning from feedback. Challenges include catastrophic forgetting, safety risks, and auditability, but overcoming these could unlock models that learn iteratively from experience. The conclusion emphasizes that while context-based methods are effective, true breakthroughs require models to compress new information into weights post-deployment, moving from mere retrieval to genuine learning.

marsbit1 год тому

a16z: AI's 'Amnesia', Can Continuous Learning Cure It?

marsbit1 год тому

Can a Hair Dryer Earn $34,000? Deciphering the Reflexivity Paradox in Prediction Markets

An individual manipulated a weather sensor at Paris Charles de Gaulle Airport with a portable heat source, causing a Polymarket weather market to settle at 22°C and earning $34,000. This incident highlights a fundamental issue in prediction markets: when a market aims to reflect reality, it also incentivizes participants to influence that reality. Prediction markets operate on two layers: platform rules (what outcome counts as a win) and data sources (what actually happened). While most focus on rules, the real vulnerability lies in the data source. If reality is recorded through a specific source, influencing that source directly affects market settlement. The article categorizes markets by their vulnerability: 1. **Single-point physical data sources** (e.g., weather stations): Easily manipulated through physical interference. 2. **Insider information markets** (e.g., MrBeast video details): Insiders like team members use non-public information to trade. Kalshi fined a剪辑师 $20,000 for insider trading. 3. **Actor-manipulated markets** (e.g., Andrew Tate’s tweet counts): The subject of the market can control the outcome. Evidence suggests Tate’sociated accounts coordinated to profit. 4. **Individual-action markets** (e.g., WNBA disruptions): A single person can execute an event to profit from their pre-placed bets. Kalshi and Polymarket handle these issues differently. Kalshi enforces strict KYC, publicly penalizes insider trading, and reports to regulators. Polymarket, with its anonymous wallet-based system, has historically been more permissive, arguing that insider information improves market accuracy. However, it cooperated with authorities in the "Van Dyke case," where a user traded on classified government information. The core paradox is reflexivity: prediction markets are designed to discover truth, but their financial incentives can distort reality. The more valuable a prediction becomes, the more likely participants are to influence the event itself. The market ceases to be a mirror of reality and instead shapes it.

marsbit2 год тому

Can a Hair Dryer Earn $34,000? Deciphering the Reflexivity Paradox in Prediction Markets

marsbit2 год тому

Торгівля

Спот
Ф'ючерси
活动图片