#稳定币支付与基础设施 Seeing the analogy of the stress test for the 2026 World Cup, I feel a bit emotional. Over the years, I've experienced too many cycles—from the ICO boom in 2017 to DeFi summer, and now to prediction markets. Every time there's a breakout, someone says "this time is different." But this time, it seems truly different.

The term "differentiated competition" is used well here. Looking back at the evolution of prediction markets, from the purely on-chain Polymarket being fined $1.4 million by the CFTC, to now directly competing with traditional giants like Robinhood and DraftKings, the dimension of competition has completely changed. It’s no longer about whose product innovation is cooler, but about who can survive the longest and stay most stable within the regulatory framework. This reminds me of the exploration of stablecoins in 2016—back then, everyone was arguing over technical routes, and now Visa is starting to use USDC for on-chain settlements.

The key data point mentioned in the article is critical: Robinhood already has an annualized revenue of $300 million just from event trading, making it the fastest-growing business line. This is not small-scale; it indicates that mainstream finance is slowly turning around. The forecast that the nominal transaction volume of prediction markets will grow more than tenfold to $13 billion/month by 2025 shows that this scale can no longer be described as "niche."

But the real watershed is infrastructure. Stablecoin payments and settlements have never been a high-tech problem; fundamentally, they are policy issues. The ECB’s warnings about private stablecoins and the gambling regulatory storms at the US state level are forcing platforms to make choices: either compromise within the regulatory framework or be pushed out of the market. The cease-and-desist order against Kalshi in Connecticut is like a warning bell—no matter how deep the liquidity, it can't protect you if you don't understand the legal boundaries.

Another detail that’s easy to overlook: sports markets have high trading frequency but small per-transaction amounts, while political and macro markets have fewer trades but larger funds. This distribution reflects two very different participant mindsets: entertainment-oriented retail traders vs. information-advantaged institutions. The former needs continuous stimulation and engagement, while the latter requires deep liquidity and trustworthy settlement. It’s very difficult for any platform to serve both masters well at the same time.

The analogy of the 2026 World Cup actually hits the core—this is not just a business opportunity, but a stress test for the resilience of the entire industry. Over five weeks, 104 matches across 16 cities, how many systems will be overwhelmed by peak order flows? Will KYC, AML, responsible gambling processes become bottlenecks under extreme concurrency? Who can survive this exam will get the ticket to the next stage.

Honestly, I favor integrated solutions backed by super apps more. Platforms like Robinhood and DraftKings, with large user bases, established KYC channels, and mature payment systems, find prediction markets much easier than startups starting from zero. Even if professional players like Kalshi and Polymarket innovate further, they can hardly compete with the traffic advantage embedded in users’ daily lives. This logic is similar to the evolution of options markets—innovative features are ultimately absorbed by mainstream channels.

Regarding stablecoins, I don’t think there will be any fundamental breakthrough by 2026. More likely, it will be gradual integration—more gambling platforms accepting stablecoin deposits, payment providers continuing to build bridges from cards to crypto, while simultaneously strengthening licensing and audits. This is essentially a process of friction reduction, not a revolution. The real revolution might have to wait for the widespread adoption of central bank digital currencies, but that’s another story.

Looking at Pantera’s forecast, which mentions DAT will be integrated into 2-3 major markets, I think this logic also applies to prediction market platforms. Ultimately, the market will concentrate in the hands of a few major players—not because they are the most technically advanced, but because liquidity, trust, and regulatory compliance will naturally centralize in large platforms. The way out for small platforms is either to specialize deeply in a niche (e.g., only crypto asset predictions) or to be acquired. This is a normal market economy choice.

The underlying logic remains unchanged: scale, compliance, liquidity—this triangle determines who survives to the end. Technological innovation is just an added bonus; the main course remains the old fundamentals.