Prediction markets are rapidly transforming from crypto curiosities into serious financial infrastructure — yet regulators still can’t decide whether they’re innovation or gambling.
Massachusetts’ 2025 lawsuit against Kalshi over NFL contracts, despite prior CFTC approval, underscored the widening gap between state and federal oversight. Meanwhile, Intercontinental Exchange’s (ICE) multi-billion-dollar investment in Polymarket pushed event-driven trading into mainstream finance.
Once dismissed as “legalized gambling,” prediction markets now attract institutional capital as regulators race to define where speculation ends and financial innovation begins.
SponsoredFederal vs. State Law: Who Sets the Line?
To assess whether these markets mark the next phase of financial innovation or remain high-stakes speculation, BeInCrypto spoke with Rachel Lin (SynFutures), Juan Pellicer (Sentora), and Leo Chan (Sportstensor). Each offered distinct views on the legal and economic forces shaping prediction markets as 2026 approaches.
Massachusetts’ challenge to Kalshi’s NFL contracts exposed a conflict between federal and state oversight. The CFTC had approved the contracts, but the state classified them as unlicensed gambling — a dispute now defining how event markets fit within US law.
“Investors should ultimately trust the federal CFTC framework, which preempts state laws on derivatives and explicitly approved Kalshi’s NFL contracts. That provides nationwide clarity amid ongoing state challenges,” said Juan Pellicer, Head of Research at Sentora.
Leo Chan, CEO of Sportstensor, added that fragmented state-level rules have already created confusion in sports-betting oversight and said consistent federal guidance would restore clarity for both platforms and participants. Both executives agreed that a uniform regulatory framework is essential for institutional adoption.
Volume vs. Value: The Real Indicator of Market Health
Industry data from Dune shows that weekly trading across major platforms has recently topped $2 billion, with Kalshi holding roughly 60% of the market and Polymarket holding about 35%, $1.3 billion and $773 million, respectively, as token-free models dominate the total value locked.
Critics note these figures include round-trip trades that inflate activity without transferring real risk. Industry leaders argue that transparency must evolve beyond raw volume metrics.
“Volume alone doesn’t reflect economic reality,” said Rachel Lin of SynFutures. “We should report time-weighted open interest and net notional settled — that shows how much risk truly transfers when markets resolve.”
Lin added that indicators such as liquidity depth, unique funded traders, and retention rates help regulators and institutions distinguish genuine participation from superficial churn. Pellicer agreed, noting that standardized disclosure of open interest, trader counts, and holding periods would strengthen confidence and prove these markets transfer real risk rather than generate noise.
Sponsored SponsoredValuations and Investor Logic
Polymarket has launched a Finance Hub offering “up/down” equity and index markets and partnered with Stocktwits to embed outcome forecasts directly into stock pages — turning investor sentiment into tradable probabilities.
Kalshi’s roughly $2 billion valuation and Polymarket’s reported $9–10 billion have sparked debate about sustainability. Some investors see justified multiples given rapid growth; others view them as speculative bets on future network effects.
“These multiples are justified by rapid scaling,” said Pellicer. “Kalshi’s annualized volume hit $50 billion from $300 million last year. Prediction markets could disrupt over $1 trillion in traditional derivatives.”
Leo Chan countered that Polymarket’s valuation reflects its potential to restructure information flow across global finance — a long-term play on monetizing collective foresight rather than short-term earnings.
SponsoredFrom Sportsbooks to Financial Infrastructure
Over 60% of Kalshi’s activity remains in sports, but diversification will decide whether institutions view prediction markets as financial utilities. Lin argued that legitimacy will come from pricing outcomes that traditional finance can’t measure.
“Institutions don’t need another way to trade earnings or macro events — they already have that,” Lin said. “Prediction markets’ real value is in quantifying what traditional finance can’t: policy decisions, tech breakthroughs, and geopolitical risks.”
Chan noted that adoption spikes during elections, major sports seasons, or breaking news — each drawing new users. Pellicer added that sustainability hinges on retention: when roughly 30% of new users stay active, “you can start calling it meaningful adoption.”
Polymarket has partnered with Stocktwits to launch earnings-based markets, while X (formerly Twitter) has named it an official data provider. Meanwhile, xAI has teamed up with Kalshi, extending prediction markets’ reach beyond crypto-native audiences.
Governance and Transparency
The IMF has warned that weak transparency and governance can amplify manipulation risks in fast-growing financial markets — a concern that equally applies to prediction markets as they scale. The sector must adopt institutional-grade standards for risk management, margining, and disclosure to evolve into credible financial utilities.
Sponsored Sponsored“Prediction markets need volatility-adjusted margins, real-time position disclosures, and independent audits,” Pellicer said. “Those reforms would transform them from speculative tools into reliable hedging utilities.”
Chan agreed, saying prediction markets behave much like options and should be supervised under comparable frameworks. Lin emphasized that strategic investors — from venture funds to financial institutions — provide crucial regulatory credibility and policy access.
Pellicer added that backers like Charles Schwab, Henry Kravis, Peter Thiel, and Vitalik Buterin bring capital and legitimacy, accelerating policy engagement and public acceptance. Major backers include Founders Fund, Blockchain Capital, Ribbit, Valor, Point72 Ventures, and Coinbase Ventures — bridging crypto-native and traditional capital in a new “probability-data” asset class.
Global Outlook: Beyond the U.S.
Europe’s MiCA framework leaves prediction markets undefined, while Singapore and Thailand ban them under gambling laws. Still, new jurisdictions like the UAE and Hong Kong are emerging as test beds for regulated growth. Chan pointed to the UK, whose balanced gambling laws and “hyper-financialized” culture could fill MiCA’s policy gap and drive early adoption.
Lin viewed global experimentation as a broader shift in how economies value information. Assigning prices to previously unmeasurable outcomes could redefine markets — from trading assets to trading knowledge. Chan suggested this trajectory could lead to “futarchy” models, where market outcomes rather than votes decide public policies.
Conclusion
The IMF’s July 2025 outlook projects 3.0% global growth — a backdrop favoring risk assets and event markets. With more explicit rules, prediction venues could become standard hedging tools for institutions and retail traders alike.
Prediction markets are moving from speculative sidelines toward financial legitimacy. ICE’s investment and CFTC approval mark a maturing infrastructure, yet legal fragmentation and governance risks persist. The line between innovation and wagering remains blurred — shaped less by technology than by regulation and trust.
If transparency and oversight advance alongside innovation, event contracts could evolve into a new class of risk-pricing tools for investors and institutions alike. Until then, prediction markets stand at a crossroads: part experiment, part infrastructure, and a live test of how finance values foresight.
