Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Crypto World

84% of Polymarket Traders Are Losing Money, New Research Finds

Published

on

84% of Polymarket Traders Are Losing Money, New Research Finds

On-chain researcher Andrey Sergeenkov found that only 2% of the 2.5 million wallets analyzed have ever made over $1,000.

84.1% of all Polymarket traders are in the red, according to new research published today, April 6, by independent on-chain analyst Andrey Sergeenkov.

The report looked at 2.5 million wallet addresses, analyzing data from on-chain transactions on Polygon, via Dune Analytics. Sergeenkov found that over the past year, only 2% of traders have ever made more than $1,000 in their entire history on the platform, and just 0.033% — or 840 addresses — have earned $100,000 trading on Polymarket.

Sergeenkov also took on the claim that traders can earn a living on Polymarket, analyzing the odds of consistently earning $5,000 per month — just below the average monthly salary in the U.S. — and found that those odds are less than 1% in any single month.

Advertisement

Sustaining profits is even rarer. “Most traders show up, trade for a short period, and leave,” the report summarizes. The odds of earning $5,000 a month drop with each consecutive month, the research found. Among the 6,600 traders who earned an average profit above $5,000 per month, just 2.6% stayed active for more than a year.

A separate study from December 2025 analyzing 124 million trades on Polymarket found that 70% were unprofitable.

The findings land as Polymarket continues its mainstream commercial momentum, earlier this month becoming MLB’s exclusive prediction market partner, as The Defiant reported.

Polymarket is currently the largest on-chain prediction market platform, and the second-largest more broadly, with $9.8 billion in notional trading volume over the past 30 days, following Kalshi with $12.5 billion, per Token Terminal.

Advertisement

Meanwhile, a new referral program as of this month is set to drive another wave of retail signups via influencers — a dynamic Sergeenkov warns could deepen the loss problem without better user education.

Prediction market volumes grew 130x from 2024 through 2025, and the sector has received increasing regulatory attention, especially in the United States. In recent months, the Trump administration’s CFTC has taken a clear stance in favor of federal oversight of prediction market platforms via the agency, recently launching a sweeping review of the sector.

Adding another layer to Polymarket’s ambitions, the platform has also just today unveiled Polymarket USD, a new proprietary stablecoin set to replace bridged USDC.e as the platform’s collateral token, as part of what the platform is calling a significant infrastructure upgrade.

As The Defiant has reported, Polymarket’s crowd-sourced odds are increasingly cited as among the most accurate forecasting tools available, a reputation that sits uneasily alongside these numbers for individual traders.

Advertisement

This article was written with the assistance of AI workflows. All our stories are curated, edited and fact-checked by a human.

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Crypto World

Kalshi Wins: Third Circuit Delivers Prediction Market Victory

Published

on

Today, the Third Circuit Court ruled in favor of KalshiEX LLC, after the platform sued New Jersey regulators for trying to restrict its federally regulated prediction market operations.

The decision, handed down on April 6, 2026, reinforces the legitimacy of prediction markets and delivers a major boost to the industry.

The Kalshi Case Explained

Back in September 2025, Kalshi brought the case against Mary Jo Flaherty, a New Jersey state regulator, after facing restrictions on its operations at the state level.

Kalshi argued that it is already regulated at the federal level by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). 

Advertisement

As a result, it claimed individual states should not have the authority to block or limit its services.

In response, state regulators maintained that prediction markets — particularly those tied to elections — could fall under state laws, including gambling-related restrictions.

This legal clash set up a broader question: whether federally regulated prediction markets can operate freely across the US, or if states can impose their own rules.

Today, the Third Circuit’s decision ultimately sided with Kalshi. It strengthens the argument that federal oversight takes priority in this space.

Advertisement

Fun Fact: Prediction markets have historically outperformed polls in forecasting election outcomes. Studies show they aggregate information more efficiently than traditional polling methods!

Why Prediction Markets Matter

Prediction markets allow users to trade contracts based on the outcome of future events, from elections to economic indicators. Unlike traditional betting, these markets are designed to aggregate information and reward accurate forecasting.

Proponents argue that prediction markets offer several advantages over conventional information sources:

Advertisement
  • Transparency: Prices reflect real-time collective expectations, visible to everyone.
  • Accuracy: Participants have financial incentives to be correct, not just persuasive.
  • Fairness: Anyone can participate and benefit from accurate predictions.

Critics, however, have raised concerns about potential manipulation and the blurring of lines between financial markets and gambling. Regulatory agencies have taken different positions on where prediction markets should fit within existing legal frameworks.

What the Kalshi Ruling Means

The Third Circuit’s decision reinforces that prediction markets can operate within constitutional boundaries. For Kalshi, this means continued legal footing to expand its platform and offerings.

For the broader industry, the ruling sends a signal that courts are willing to recognize prediction markets as legitimate financial instruments rather than gambling operations.

Millions of users who rely on prediction markets for information and hedging now have greater certainty about the legal status of these platforms. As a result, the decision could accelerate institutional adoption and innovation in the space.

The prediction market industry just got its strongest legal endorsement yet.

Advertisement

The post Kalshi Wins: Third Circuit Delivers Prediction Market Victory appeared first on BeInCrypto.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

Appellate Court Affirms Blocking New Jersey Enforcement against Kalshi

Published

on

Law, New Jersey, Enforcement, Kalshi, Prediction Markets

A US appellate court has ruled against New Jersey gaming authorities for bringing an enforcement action against prediction market platform Kalshi over sports event contracts. 

In a Monday-issued opinion, a panel of judges in the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled 2-1 in favor of Kalshi’s argument that the company had a ”reasonable chance of success” claiming that the Commodity Exchange Act preempted state law, setting the stage for a potential battle over gaming laws in the US Supreme Court.

“This is a big win for the industry and millions of users,” Kalshi CEO Tarek Mansour said in a social media post on X.

The appellate court’s opinion affirmed a lower court ruling, in which Kalshi argued that the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) had “exclusive jurisdiction” in regulating sports-related event contracts as swaps that fall under its purview.

Advertisement

“Allowing New Jersey to enforce its gambling laws and state constitution would create an obstacle to executing the Act because such state enforcement would prohibit Kalshi, which operates a licensed [designated contract market] under the exclusive jurisdiction of the CFTC, from offering its sports-related event contracts in New Jersey,” wrote Circuit Judge David J. Porter. “This state regulation is exactly the patchwork that Congress replaced wholecloth by creating the CFTC.”

Law, New Jersey, Enforcement, Kalshi, Prediction Markets
Monday’s Third Circuit opinion affirming lower court ruling. Source: PACER

The circuit court ruling came just days after a Nevada judge extended a ban on Kalshi offering event-based contracts, following several other state authorities cracking down on sports betting on prediction markets. The patchwork of state-level rulings could lead to the US Supreme Court taking up one of the cases, potentially changing its 2018 decision giving states the authority to regulate sports gambling.

Related: Texas Lt. Gov. calls for study of crypto, prediction markets

In her dissent, Circuit Judge Jane Roth said the prediction markets platform’s actions were a “performative sleight meant to obscure the reality that Kalshi’s products are sports gambling,” adding that the company’s event contracts were “virtually indistinguishable” from those on betting websites:

“[T]he question of whether sports-event contracts are swaps is a thorny issue with the potential to radically upend the legal landscape governing the gambling industry, and I am not convinced the Majority’s analysis does this issue justice.”

CFTC chair reiterates agency’s position on prediction markets

CFTC Chair Michael Selig, the sole commissioner at the financial agency following the departure of acting chair Caroline Pham in December, has made prediction markets one of the commission’s central issues since taking office. In the last four months, Selig has claimed that the CFTC has “exclusive jurisdiction” in regulating event contracts on prediction markets, opened a proposed rule to public comment and filed an amicus brief supporting its position in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in a case involving Nevada’s gaming authorities.

Advertisement

The regulator last week sued Arizona, Connecticut and Illinois to block them from pursuing what it said were unlawful efforts to regulate prediction markets.

“Our definition of commodity and statute is very broad,” Selig said at the Digital Assets and Emerging Tech Policy Summit at Vanderbilt University on Monday. “It includes events on sports, it includes events in politics, it includes corn and grains and all sorts of things. It doesn’t really distinguish between if you’re offering an event contract on grains, you’re regulating that differently than an event contract on sports.”

The CFTC chair added that there were exceptions for event contracts that were “readily susceptible to manipulation.”

Advertisement

Magazine: AI agents will kill the web as we know it: Animoca’s Yat Siu