The $120 Billion Mirage: Penny Combos Inflated Prediction Market Volumes in Q3

Monday, 09/11/2026 | 20:52 GMT by Tanya Chepkova
  • Four prediction venues recorded $179.6 billion in Q3 nominal volume, while buyers paid $56.1 billion for the contracts.
  • Kalshi combos contributed $67.1 billion in nominal volume, helping explain why headline turnover grew faster than purchase payments.
Prediction markets. Source: Shutterstock
Prediction markets. Source: Shutterstock

Prediction markets celebrated a record $179.6 billion in trading volume in the third quarter. Still, a look beneath the headline figures reveals that actual capital deployed was less than a third of that total.

According to the data from Prediction Frontier, traders paid just $56.1 billion for those contracts, with the massive $123 billion gap driven by how venues count low-cost multi-leg "combos."

The report, covering Kalshi, Polymarket’s international and US venues, and Novig, reflects the gap, created by the counting specifics: cheaper combinations of outcomes generate substantial payout-based volume from comparatively small purchases.

How $56 Billion Became $180 Billion

The report counts each traded contract at its $1 payout value, a convention Kalshi also uses in its reporting. Its alternative measure, “dollars paid”, multiplies the number of contracts by their execution price.

Buying 100 contracts for three cents each therefore produces $100 in nominal volume and $3 in purchase payments.

Combos widen the difference by combining several outcomes in one position. Under Kalshi’s rules, a combo pays $1 when every component settles at $1; any component settling at zero makes the whole contract worthless.

Low-priced combinations consequently generate more nominal volume per dollar spent on prediction markets.

Neither volume measure represents fresh deposits: contracts can trade repeatedly, and traders can reuse funds.

Kalshi’s Combos Widen the Gap

Kalshi combos accounted for $67.1 billion of quarterly nominal volume, which is more than a third of the four-venue total. On Kalshi, the average purchase payment per $1 contract fell from 32 cents in July to 24 cents in September.

Polymarket’s figure stayed near 50 cents. That changing mix matters when interpreting monthly records. Kalshi’s September nominal volume reached $60.7 billion, but dollars paid totalled $14.7 billion, just 10% above July, according to the report.

Across the tracked venues, nominal volume grew 84.3% quarter-on-quarter, against 54.7% growth in dollars paid. Nominal volume thus increased from about 2.7 times purchase payments in Q2 to 3.2 times in Q3.

The comparison includes expanded coverage, with Novig data beginning on August 4. Both measures rose in Q3, but their widening gap changes how the market’s records should be read.

For brokers comparing venues or gauging customer activity, nominal volume alone can obscure a shift toward cheaper contracts; dollars paid show whether purchase spending kept pace.

Prediction markets celebrated a record $179.6 billion in trading volume in the third quarter. Still, a look beneath the headline figures reveals that actual capital deployed was less than a third of that total.

According to the data from Prediction Frontier, traders paid just $56.1 billion for those contracts, with the massive $123 billion gap driven by how venues count low-cost multi-leg "combos."

The report, covering Kalshi, Polymarket’s international and US venues, and Novig, reflects the gap, created by the counting specifics: cheaper combinations of outcomes generate substantial payout-based volume from comparatively small purchases.

How $56 Billion Became $180 Billion

The report counts each traded contract at its $1 payout value, a convention Kalshi also uses in its reporting. Its alternative measure, “dollars paid”, multiplies the number of contracts by their execution price.

Buying 100 contracts for three cents each therefore produces $100 in nominal volume and $3 in purchase payments.

Combos widen the difference by combining several outcomes in one position. Under Kalshi’s rules, a combo pays $1 when every component settles at $1; any component settling at zero makes the whole contract worthless.

Low-priced combinations consequently generate more nominal volume per dollar spent on prediction markets.

Neither volume measure represents fresh deposits: contracts can trade repeatedly, and traders can reuse funds.

Kalshi’s Combos Widen the Gap

Kalshi combos accounted for $67.1 billion of quarterly nominal volume, which is more than a third of the four-venue total. On Kalshi, the average purchase payment per $1 contract fell from 32 cents in July to 24 cents in September.

Polymarket’s figure stayed near 50 cents. That changing mix matters when interpreting monthly records. Kalshi’s September nominal volume reached $60.7 billion, but dollars paid totalled $14.7 billion, just 10% above July, according to the report.

Across the tracked venues, nominal volume grew 84.3% quarter-on-quarter, against 54.7% growth in dollars paid. Nominal volume thus increased from about 2.7 times purchase payments in Q2 to 3.2 times in Q3.

The comparison includes expanded coverage, with Novig data beginning on August 4. Both measures rose in Q3, but their widening gap changes how the market’s records should be read.

For brokers comparing venues or gauging customer activity, nominal volume alone can obscure a shift toward cheaper contracts; dollars paid show whether purchase spending kept pace.

About the Author: Tanya Chepkova
Tanya Chepkova
  • 588 Articles
  • 5 Followers
About the Author: Tanya Chepkova
Tanya Chepkova is a News Editor at Finance Magnates with more than 16 years of experience in financial journalism, covering forex, crypto, and digital asset markets. Her work spans daily industry reporting and data-driven, long-form explainers focused on market structure, trading models, and regulatory shifts. Before joining Finance Magnates, she led the editorial team of a cryptocurrency-focused media outlet for six years. Her reporting combines analytical depth with clear storytelling, with particular attention to how structural changes in trading, stablecoin infrastructure, and emerging products such as prediction markets reshape the broader financial ecosystem. She covers global developments and provides additional insight into CIS markets. Areas of Coverage: Crypto and digital asset markets Prediction markets Stablecoins and cross-border payments Industry analysis and long-form explainers
  • 588 Articles
  • 5 Followers

More from the Author

FinTech

!"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|} !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}