Prediction markets vs. insider trading: Founders admit blockchain transparency is the only defense

Prediction markets are increasingly being framed not as gambling platforms but as vehicles for monetizing information, though founders acknowledged the line can blur depending on user intent at Consensus Hong Kong 2026.

Ding X, founder of Predict.fun, argued that prediction markets more closely resemble insurance underwriting or poker than roulette. “It’s more information trading and trying to hedge risk, rather than gambling,” he said, distinguishing skill-based forecasting from games where long-term odds guarantee losses.

Farokh Sarmad, co-founder of DASTAN, agreed that speculation exists but described the sector as “a multi-trillion dollar asset class in the making.” In his view, prediction markets are simply “financializing information,” allowing participants to monetize insight rather than leaving value solely with media companies or bookmakers.

Jared Dillinger, CEO of New Prontera Group and a former professional athlete, said the classification depends largely on how platforms are built and used. “It just depends on the eyes of the beholder,” he said, adding that prediction markets function as “an information asset class,” even if some users approach them like bets.

The more pressing challenge is insider trading. High-profile examples—from leaked entertainment setlists to geopolitical developments—have underscored the risk of information asymmetry.

“Insider information is not okay,” Sarmad said, noting that blockchain transparency can make suspicious wallets visible. Still, Dillinger acknowledged enforcement limits. “There’s always going to be some loopholes that people will find.”

As trading volumes rise and regulators take notice, founders agreed that surveillance tools, clearer disclosure norms and stronger platform governance will determine whether prediction markets mature into a recognized financial category—or remain viewed as speculative betting.