A June 2026 arXiv paper studied whether prediction-market prices match option-implied probabilities for bitcoin threshold contracts. The paper compared Polymarket yes prices with values implied by listed Binance call options, then extended parts of the analysis to Deribit. Its main finding was that economically similar payoffs could show persistent pricing gaps across venues.
That matters because crypto traders often read a prediction-market price as a simple probability. Polymarket documentation describes binary markets as yes and no outcome tokens, while public crypto-market pages show short-term up-or-down contracts where the price is interpreted as implied odds. Binance and CME materials, by contrast, frame options and futures as instruments for directional exposure, hedging and price-risk management.
The gap between those worlds can come from different users, different leverage, collateral rules, fees, settlement mechanics, jurisdiction, market depth and speed of information transfer. A contract that looks equivalent on a payoff chart may not be equivalent after funding costs, execution risk, withdrawal friction and resolution rules.
For traders, the lesson is not to assume every odds difference is free money. Compare the exact underlying, strike or threshold, expiry time, settlement source, collateral asset, trading fees and liquidity. If one venue resolves by an event rule and another settles from an exchange reference price, basis and dispute risk must be part of the trade plan.
Risk notice: Options, futures and prediction markets can lose money quickly and may face regulatory, settlement and liquidity risks. This article is market education only and not a recommendation to trade any venue.
Sources: arXiv paper on prediction markets and options | Polymarket Bitcoin markets | Binance options education | CME Bitcoin futures specs
原创文章，作者：financial transaction，如若转载，请注明出处：https://www.fanbi.net/archives/3627
