Billion-Dollar Valuation Deep Dive: Why is the Market Struggling to Support High Leverage After Reaching a Ten Billion Valuation?
Original Article Title: Everyone's Promising 20x Leverage on Prediction Markets. Here's Why It's Hard
Original Article Author: @hyperreal_nick, Crypto KOL
Original Article Translation: Azuma, Odaily Planet Daily
Editor's Note: This week, while compiling the new projects emerging during the Solana Breakpoint cycle, I noticed that some prediction markets emphasizing leverage functionality were popping up. However, upon surveying the market, the current situation is that while established platforms tend to steer clear of leverage functionality, the new platforms claiming to support the feature generally face issues such as lower multipliers and smaller pools.
Compared to the adjacent hot track of Perp DEX, it seems that the leverage space in the prediction market track has yet to be effectively explored. In the highly risk-tolerant cryptocurrency market, this situation is highly discordant. Therefore, I began gathering information to find answers, and during this process, I came across two quite high-quality analytical articles. One is Messari's Kaleb Rasmussen's research report "Enabling Leverage on Prediction Markets," which provides a very thorough argument, but is inconvenient to translate due to its lengthy nature and numerous mathematical calculations; the other is Nick-RZA's "Everyone's Promising 20x Leverage on Prediction Markets. Here's Why It's Hard" from Linera, which is more concise and straightforward, yet sufficient to address the leverage challenge in prediction markets.
Below is the original content by Nick-RZA, translated by Odaily Planet Daily.
Currently, almost everyone wants to add leverage functionality to prediction markets.
Earlier, I wrote an article titled "The Expression Problem," and the conclusion was that prediction markets restrict the intensity of beliefs that capital can express. It turns out that many teams are already trying to solve this problem.
After a $20 billion investment from the parent company of the New York Stock Exchange, Polymarket is now valued at $90 billion, and its founder Shayne Coplan even appeared on "60 Minutes." Kalshi was initially valued at $5 billion and raised $300 million, then completed a new $1 billion funding round at a valuation of $110 billion.
The race is heating up, with competitors vying for the next layer of demand—leverage. Currently, there are at least a dozen projects attempting to build a "leveraged prediction market," with some claiming to achieve 10x, 20x, or even higher leverage. However, when you delve into the analysis provided by teams genuinely tackling this issue (such as HIP-4, Drift's BET, Kalshi's framework)—you will find that their conclusions are converging on a very conservative number: between 1x and 1.5x.
This is a significant gap, so where exactly is the problem?
Prediction Markets vs. Spot and Futures Trading
Let's start with the basics. Prediction markets allow you to bet on whether an event will occur: Will Bitcoin reach $150,000 by the end of the year? Will Team 49 win the Super Bowl? Will it rain in Tokyo tomorrow?
You are purchasing a kind of "share," and if you predict correctly, you will receive $1; if you are wrong, you get nothing—it's that simple.
If you believe BTC will rise to $150,000, and the price of the "YES share" is $0.40, you can spend $40 to buy 100 shares. If you are correct, you will get back $100, making a net profit of $60; if you are wrong, you lose your $40.
This mechanism brings three characteristics to prediction markets that are fundamentally different from spot trading or perpetual contracts:
· First, there is a clear upper limit. The highest value of a "YES share" (similarly for a "NO share") will always be $1. If you buy at $0.90, the maximum upside potential is only 11%. This is not like buying an early meme coin.
· Second, the lower limit is a true zero. It's not a nearly-zero crash; it's a literal zero. Your position will not gradually diminish over time—either you predict correctly, or it zeros out.
· Third, the outcome is binary, and the result is usually confirmed instantaneously. There is no gradual price discovery process here; elections may be undecided one moment and results are immediately announced the next. Consequently, the price does not slowly rise from $0.80 to $1; it "jumps" directly to $1.
The Essence of Leverage
The essence of leverage is to borrow money to amplify your bet.
If you have $100 and use 10x leverage, you are actually controlling a $1000 position— if the price goes up by 10%, you earn not $10, but $100; conversely, if the price drops by 10%, you don't lose $10, but your entire principal. This is also the meaning of liquidation— the trading platform will forcibly close your position before you lose more than your principal to prevent the lending party (the trading platform or liquidity pool) from incurring losses.
The key premise for leverage to work on traditional assets is that the price movement of the asset is continuous.
If you go long on BTC with 10x leverage at a $100,000 price point, you will likely be liquidated around $91,000–$92,000, but BTC will not instantaneously drop from $100,000 to $80,000. It will decline gradually, even if rapidly, in a linear manner— 99500 → 99000 → 98400 …… During this process, the liquidation engine will intervene timely and close your position. You may lose money, but the system is secure.
Predictive markets, however, break free from this premise.
Core Issue: Price Jumps
In the derivatives field, this is known as "jump risk" or "gap risk," while the cryptocurrency community might call it "scam wicks."
Let's stick with the BTC example. Imagine the price doesn't gradually drop but instead jumps directly— from $100,000 one second to $80,000 the next, with no trades in between at prices like $99,000, $95,000, or $91,000 where you could be liquidated.
In this scenario, the liquidation engine still attempts to close at $91,000, but that price simply doesn't exist in the market, and the next available price is $80,000. At this point, your position is not just liquidated but plunged into insolvency, and someone has to bear this loss.
This is precisely the situation predictive markets face.
When election results are announced, a match outcome is determined, or significant news breaks, the price doesn't move slowly in a linear fashion but experiences wild swings. Furthermore, leveraged positions within the system cannot be efficiently unwound because there is simply no liquidity in between.
Messari's Kaleb Rasmussen once wrote a detailed analysis on this issue (https://messari.io/report/enabling-leverage-on-prediction-markets). The ultimate conclusion he provided was: If the lender can correctly price jump risk, the fee they need to charge (similar to a funding rate) should consume all the upside gains of the leveraged position. This means that for a trader, opening a leveraged position at a fair rate does not offer any advantage in returns compared to directly taking a position without leverage, and also exposes them to greater downside risk.
So, when you see a platform claiming to offer 10x, 20x leverage in the prediction market, there are only two possibilities:
· Either their fees do not accurately reflect the risk (meaning someone is bearing uncompensated risk);
· Or the platform is using some undisclosed mechanism.
Real-Life Example: Lesson Learned from dYdX
This is not just theoretical talk, we have already had real-life examples.
In October 2024, dYdX launched TRUMPWIN—an leveraged perpetual market on whether Trump would win the election, supporting up to 20x leverage, with the price feed coming from Polymarket.
They were not unaware of the risks, and even designed multiple protective mechanisms for the system:
· Market makers could hedge dYdX's exposure in Polymarket's spot market;
· There was an insurance fund to cover losses in case of unsuccessful liquidation;
· If the insurance fund was depleted, losses would be shared among all profitable traders (though no one likes it, it's better than bankruptcy; a harsher version is ADL, liquidating winning positions directly);
· A dynamic margin mechanism would automatically reduce available leverage as open interest increased.
By the standards of perpetual contracts, this was already quite mature. dYdX even publicly issued a warning about deleveraging risks. Then, election night arrived.
As the results gradually became clear, a Trump victory became almost certain. The price of the "YES shares" on Polymarket jumped from around $0.60 to $1—not gradually, but in a jump, piercing through the system.
The system attempted to settle underwater positions, but there was simply not enough liquidity, and the order book was thin; the market maker that was supposed to hedge on Polymarket also couldn't adjust their position in time; the insurance fund was also depleted... When positions couldn't be smoothly settled, a random deleveraging event was triggered—forcing the system to close part of the positions, regardless of whether the counterparty had sufficient collateral.
According to the analysis by Kalshi's crypto lead John Wang: "Hedging delays, extreme slippage, and liquidity evaporation have caused originally executable traders to suffer losses." Some traders who should have been safe—with correct positions and sufficient collateral—still suffered losses.
This is not a risk-management-lacking junk DEX; it used to be one of the world's largest decentralized derivatives trading platforms, with multiple layers of protection and issued clear warnings in advance.
Nevertheless, its system still experienced partial failure in a real market environment.
Industry-proposed Solutions
Regarding the leverage issue in prediction markets, the entire industry has split into three camps, and this division itself reveals each team's attitude toward risk.
Camp One: Limiting Leverage
Some teams, after realizing the mathematical reality, have chosen the most honest answer—hardly providing any leverage.
· HyperliquidX's HIP-4 proposal sets the leverage cap at 1x—this is not because it's technically unfeasible, but because they believe it's the only safe level in a binary outcome.
· DriftProtocol's BET product requires 100% collateral, meaning full collateralization with no borrowing.
· Kalshi's crypto lead John Wang's framework similarly suggests that, without additional protective mechanisms, safe leverage is around 1–1.5x.
Camp Two: Leveraging Engineering to Mitigate Risk
Another set of teams are attempting to build sufficiently complex systems to manage risk.
· D8X dynamically adjusts leverage, fees, and slippage based on market conditions—the closer to settlement or extreme probability, the stricter the limits;
· dYdX has developed the safeguard mechanism that we just witnessed fail on election night and is still continuously iterating;
· The solution proposed by PredictEX is to increase fees and reduce maximum leverage when price jump risk rises, and then relax these measures when the market stabilizes — its founder Ben put it bluntly: "If the perpetual contract model is directly applied, market makers will be completely wiped out in one second when the probability jumps from 10% to 99%."
These engineering-oriented teams do not claim to have solved the problem; they are simply attempting real-time risk management.
Camp Three: Launch First, Fill in the Gaps Later
There are also teams that choose to launch quickly, directly claiming 10x, 20x, or even higher leverage without publicly disclosing how they handle jump risk. Perhaps they have elegant solutions that have not been disclosed, or perhaps they intend to learn in a production environment.
The crypto industry has always had a tradition of "move fast and break things," and the market will ultimately determine which approach holds up.
What Will Happen in the Future?
What we are facing is a problem with an extremely open design space, which is precisely its most interesting aspect.
Kaleb Rasmussen's report from Messari not only diagnoses the problem but also proposes some possible directions:
· Do not price risk for the entire position at once but charge rolling fees based on changing conditions;
· Design an auction mechanism for price jumps to give value back to liquidity providers;
· Build a system that allows market makers to sustainably profit without being crushed by information asymmetry.
However, these solutions are essentially improvements within the existing framework.
Deepanshu from EthosX has proposed a more fundamental rethink. Having previously researched and built clearing infrastructures at JPMorgan's Global Clearing Business for LCH, CME, Eurex, and others, he believes that trying to add leverage to the prediction market using the perpetual contract model is fundamentally addressing the wrong problem.
The prediction market is not a perpetual contract; it is an extreme form of exotic options — more complex than products usually dealt with in traditional finance. Exotic options do not trade on perpetual trading platforms; they are generally settled through payment systems designed specifically for their risks. Such infrastructure should be able to:
· Provide traders with a time window for margin call response;
· Allow other traders to take over positions before they get liquidated;
· Implement a multi-layered insurance fund to make participants explicitly accept the socialization of tail risk.
These are not new—clearinghouses have been managing tail risk for decades. The real challenge is—how to achieve all this on-chain, transparently, at the speed dictated by the market's needs.
Dynamic fees and leverage decay are just the beginning; the teams that will truly solve the problem are likely not only to build a better perpetual engine but also to construct a "clearinghouse-level" system. The infrastructure layer remains unresolved, while the market demand has become very clear.
You may also like

December 24th Market Key Intelligence, How Much Did You Miss?

Venture Capital Post-Mortem 2025: Hashrate is King, Narrative is Dead

Are Those High-Raised 2021 Projects Still Alive?

Aave Community Governance Drama Escalates, What's the Overseas Crypto Community Talking About Today?

Key Market Information Discrepancy on December 24th - A Must-See! | Alpha Morning Report

2025 Whale Saga: Mansion Kidnapping, Supply Chain Poisoning, and Billions Liquidated

IOSG: From Compute to Intelligence, a Reinforcement Learning-Driven Decentralized AI Investment Map

Believing in the Capital Market - The Essence and Core Value of Cryptocurrency

Absorb Polymarket Old Guard, Coinbase Plunges Into Prediction Market Abyss
AI Trading Risks in Crypto Markets: Who Takes Responsibility When It Fails?
AI trading is already core market infrastructure, but regulators still treat it as a tool — responsibility always stays with the humans and platforms behind it. The biggest risk in 2025 is not rogue algorithms, but mass-adopted AI strategies that move markets in sync and blur the line between tools and unlicensed advice. The next phase of AI trading is defined by accountability and transparency, not performance — compliance is now a survival requirement, not a constraint.

Ether pumps to outsiders, dumps in-house. Can Tom Lee's team still be trusted?

Coinbase Joins Prediction Market, AAVE Governance Dispute - What's the Overseas Crypto Community Talking About Today?
Over the past 24 hours, the crypto market has shown strong momentum across multiple dimensions. The mainstream discussion has focused on Coinbase's official entry into the prediction market through the acquisition of The Clearing Company, as well as the intense controversy within the AAVE community regarding token incentives and governance rights.
In terms of ecosystem development, Solana has introduced the innovative Kora fee layer aimed at reducing user transaction costs; meanwhile, the Perp DEX competition has intensified, with the showdown between Hyperliquid and Lighter sparking widespread community discussion on the future of decentralized derivatives.
This week, Coinbase announced the acquisition of The Clearing Company, marking another significant move to deepen its presence in this field after last week's announcement of launching a prediction market on its platform.
The Clearing Company's founder, Toni Gemayel, and the team will join Coinbase to jointly drive the development of the prediction market business.
Coinbase's Product Lead, Shan Aggarwal, stated that the growth of the prediction market is still in its early stages and predicts that 2026 will be the breakout year for this field.
The community has reacted positively to this, generally believing that Coinbase's entry will bring significant traffic and compliance advantages to the prediction market. However, this has also sparked discussions about the industry's competitive landscape.
Jai Bhavnani, Founder of Rivalry, commented that for startups, if their product model proves to be successful, industry giants like Coinbase have ample reason to replicate it.
This serves as a reminder to all entrepreneurs in the crypto space that they must build significant moats to withstand competition pressure from these giants.
Regulated prediction market platform Kalshi launched its research arm, Kalshi Research, this week, aimed at opening its internal data to the academic community and researchers to facilitate exploration of prediction market-related topics.
Its inaugural research report highlights Kalshi's outperformance in predicting inflation compared to Wall Street's traditional models. Kalshi co-founder Luana Lopes Lara commented that the power of prediction markets lies in the valuable data they generate, and it is now time to better utilize this data.
Meanwhile, Kalshi announced its support for the BNB Chain (BSC), allowing users to deposit and withdraw BNB and USDT via the BSC network.
This move is seen as a significant step for Kalshi to open its platform to a broader crypto user base, aiming to unlock access to the world's largest prediction market. Furthermore, Kalshi also revealed plans to host the first Prediction Market Summit in 2026 to further drive industry engagement and development.
The AAVE community recently engaged in heated debates around an Aave Improvement Proposal (AIP) titled "AAVE Tokenomics Alignment Phase One - Ownership Governance," aiming to transfer ownership and control of the Aave brand from Aave Labs to Aave DAO.
Aave founder Stani Kulechov publicly stated his intention to vote against the proposal, believing it oversimplifies the complex legal and operational structure, potentially slowing down the development process of core products like Aave V4.
The community's reaction was polarized. Some criticized Stani for adopting a "double standard" in governance and questioned whether his team had siphoned off protocol revenue, while others supported his cautious stance, arguing that significant governance changes require more thorough discussion.
This controversy highlights the tension between the ideal of DAO governance in DeFi projects and the actual power held by core development teams.
Despite governance disputes putting pressure on the AAVE token price, on-chain data shows that Stani Kulechov himself has purchased millions of dollars' worth of AAVE in the past few hours.
Simultaneously, a whale address, 0xDDC4, which had been quiet for 6 months, once again spent 500 ETH (approximately $1.53 million) to purchase 9,629 AAVE tokens. Data indicates that this whale has accumulated nearly 40,000 AAVE over the past year but is currently in an unrealized loss position.
The founder and whale's increased holdings during market volatility were interpreted by some investors as a confidence signal in AAVE's long-term value.
In this week's top article, Morpho Labs' "Curator Explained" detailed the role of "curators" in DeFi.
The article likened curators to asset managers in traditional finance, who design, deploy, and manage on-chain vaults, providing users with a one-click diversified investment portfolio.
Unlike traditional fund managers, DeFi curators execute strategies automatically through non-custodial smart contracts, allowing users to maintain full control of their assets. The article offered a new perspective on the specialization and risk management in the DeFi space.
Another widely circulated article, "Ethereum 2025: From Experiment to Global Infrastructure," provided a comprehensive summary of Ethereum's development over the past year. The article noted that 2025 is a crucial year for Ethereum's transition from an experimental project to global financial infrastructure. Through the Pectra and Fusaka hard forks, Ethereum achieved significant reductions in account abstraction and transaction costs.
Furthermore, the SEC's clarification of Ethereum's "non-securities" nature and the launch of tokenized funds on the Ethereum mainnet by traditional financial giants like JPMorgan marked Ethereum's gaining recognition from mainstream institutions. The article suggested that whether it is the continued growth of DeFi, the thriving L2 ecosystem, or the integration with the AI field, Ethereum's vision as the "world computer" is gradually becoming a reality.
The Solana Foundation engineering team released a fee layer solution called Kora this week.
Kora is a fee relayer and signatory node designed to provide the Solana ecosystem with a more flexible transaction fee payment method. Through Kora, users will be able to achieve gas-free transactions or choose to pay network fees using any stablecoin or SPL token. This innovation is seen as an important step in lowering the barrier of entry for new users and improving Solana network's availability.
Additionally, a deep research report on propAMM (proactive market maker) sparked community interest. The report's data analysis of propAMMs on Solana like HumidiFi indicated that Solana has achieved, or even surpassed, the level of transaction execution quality in traditional finance (TradFi) markets.
For example, on the SOL-USDC trading pair, HumidiFi is able to provide a highly competitive spread for large trades (0.4-1.6 bps), which is already better than the trading slippage of some mid-cap stocks in traditional markets.
Research suggests that propAMM is making the vision of the "Internet Capital Market" a reality, with Solana emerging as the prime venue for all of this to happen.
The competition in the perpetual contract DEX (Perp DEX) space is becoming increasingly heated.
In its latest official article, Hyperliquid has positioned its emerging competitor, Lighter, alongside centralized exchanges like Binance, referring to it as a platform utilizing a centralized sequencer. Hyperliquid emphasizes its transparency advantage of being "fully on-chain, operated by a validator network, and with no hidden state."
The community widely interprets this as Hyperliquid declaring "war" on Lighter. The technical differences between the two platforms have also become a focal point of discussion: Hyperliquid focuses on ultimate on-chain transparency, while Lighter emphasizes achieving "verifiable execution" through zero-knowledge proofs to provide users with a Central Limit Order Book (CLOB)-like trading experience.
This battle over the future direction of decentralized derivatives exchanges is expected to peak in 2026.
Meanwhile, discussions about Lighter's trading fees have surfaced. Some users have pointed out that Lighter charged as much as 81 basis points (0.81%) for a $2 million USD/JPY forex trade, far exceeding the near-zero spreads of traditional forex brokers.
Some argue that Lighter does not follow a B-book model that bets against market makers, instead anchoring its prices to the TradFi market, and the high fees may be related to the current liquidity or market maker balance incentives. Providing a more competitive spread for real-world assets (RWA) in the highly volatile crypto market is a key issue Lighter will need to address in the future.

2025 Asset Review: Why Did Bitcoin Significantly Underperform Gold and US Stocks?

Why Did Market Sentiment Completely Collapse in 2025? Decoding Messari's Ten-Thousand-Word Annual Report

Twitter 上的「虚假流量」是指通过操纵关注者数量、喜欢和转发等指标来人为增加一条推文的影响力和可信度。下面是一些常见的制造虚假流量的方法: 1. <b>购买关注者:</b> 一些用户会通过购买关注者来迅速增加他们的关注者数量,从而让他们的账号看起来更受欢迎。 2. <b>使用机器人账号:</b> 制造虚假流量的另一种常见方法是使用机器人账号自动执行喜欢、转发和评论等互动操作,从而提高一条推文的互动量。 3. <b>推文交换:</b> 一些用户之间会进行推文交换,即互相喜欢、转发对方的推文...

Audiera Sees Massive Price Surge – Key Cryptocurrency Updates
Key Takeaways Audiera (BEAT) has witnessed significant growth, experiencing a 70.10% increase in the past week. Despite the…

In Vietnam, USDT’s Use and the Reality of Web3 Adoption
Key Takeaways Vietnam has emerged as a leading nation in the adoption of cryptocurrencies, despite cultural and regulatory…

Facing Losses: A Trader’s Journey to Redemption
Key Takeaways Emotional reactions to trading losses, such as increasing risks or exiting the market entirely, often reflect…
December 24th Market Key Intelligence, How Much Did You Miss?
Venture Capital Post-Mortem 2025: Hashrate is King, Narrative is Dead
Are Those High-Raised 2021 Projects Still Alive?
Aave Community Governance Drama Escalates, What's the Overseas Crypto Community Talking About Today?
Key Market Information Discrepancy on December 24th - A Must-See! | Alpha Morning Report
2025 Whale Saga: Mansion Kidnapping, Supply Chain Poisoning, and Billions Liquidated
Popular coins
Latest Crypto News
Customer Support:@weikecs
Business Cooperation:@weikecs
Quant Trading & MM:bd@weex.com
VIP Services:support@weex.com