The Prediction Market Boom Is Real. In Asia, So Is the Ban Hammer

As prediction market platforms emerge in Asia, governments across the region are ruling them out as illegal, raising questions on the distinction between finance and gambling

Jan 29, 2026

Prediction markets have surged in popularity in the U.S., but in Asia they are constricted. Interest exists and local players have emerged, but regulatory frameworks do not accommodate their growth.

In the past year, several Asian markets had moved to block access to prediction market platforms, declaring it as illegal gambling as opposed to a legitimate financial service.

Singapore’s Gambling Regulatory Authority (GRA) blocked access to the U.S.-based prediction market Polymarket site on 12 January 2025, deeming Polymarket as an unlicensed gambling site under local regulations. In the same week, Thailand’s law enforcement announced plans to propose a similar ban, declaring that the platform’s betting activities with cryptocurrency is a violation of local laws.

The developments are in line with Taiwan’s call to block the platform, the first jurisdiction to do so. People were using the site to bet on its 2024 presidential election—an unlawful act in Taiwan. In Mainland China, Polymarket had also been made inaccessible.

Prediction markets like Polymarket allow users to buy and sell contracts on the outcomes of future real-world events. Users can place a “yes” or “no” prediction on a wide range of events, from elections to sports. These platforms have delivered valuable forecasts, as they are able to aggregate information from many participants. But because participants are financially incentivized, regulators continue to debate whether the platforms function as financial instruments, polling services, or online gambling sites. On top of that, prediction markets are prone to be manipulated; concerns over insider trading are growing.

In Asia, several local prediction market platforms have started to emerge. Or rather, platforms serving the Asian region. The whereabouts of their headquarters seem elusive. It looks like the recent crackdowns are affecting how platforms are devising their go-to market strategies. Which begs the question: how are the players who are looking to serve the Asian markets situate themselves in a murky legal landscape?

First, we must understand the global context.

A Stratospheric Growth

Prediction markets have seen growing traction over the past decade. It gained mainstream recognition during the recent 2024 U.S. presidential election, when it accurately predicted the outcome of the race hours before the media did. During the lead-up to the election, it showed a clearer picture of the race, putting Trump ahead of Harris when pollsters saw a deadlocked contest.

More recently, media outlets have embraced these platforms as their data partners. CNN, for one, announced Kalshi as its official partner last December. Meanwhile, Dow Jones (owner of The Wall Street Journal and Market Watch, among others) announced a partnership with Polymarket this January. Polymarket’s real-time data will be available across Dow Jones’ platforms.

This month, prediction markets hit record volume trades. In mid-January, it hit a record of US$701.7 million in single-day trading volume, with Kalshi dominating the activity with US$465.9 million in volume. With the amount of money aggregating on these sites, people have begun to quit their day job to trade on prediction markets full-time. One trader said he made US$100,000 in a month. His last salary was US$75,000 a year.

This level of normalization is what Asian regulators are resisting. But Asia is not missing out on the hype. Prediction markets have flourished despite the legal gray area.

In South Korea, for example, according to a report by The Chosun Daily, a new prediction market platform Opinion saw its weekly trading volume surpassing 2 trillion Korean won within a month of launching. One of the bets was: “Will New Jeans Resume Activities in March?” The volume being traded on that topic had surpassed 4 billion Korean won, according to the same report.

In South Korea, gambling is illegal. Where does a prediction market like opinion stand, then? The legality battle surrounding prediction markets is still in motion. And that is true for markets across the globe.

The Ongoing Legal Battle

Even in the U.S., different entities are challenging the status of its prediction market players. Several states’ gaming regulators have issued cease-and-desist orders to platforms including Kalshi and Polymarket for offering sports-related contracts, making a case that these platforms are operating unlicensed sports betting.

For context, Kalshi operates as a CFTC-regulated Designated Contract Market (DCM). Polymarket’s footprint is more split: a U.S.-regulated entity (“Polymarket US”) sits under the CFTC framework, while the broader product has faced restrictions in multiple jurisdictions. The distinction matters because a derivatives-style label comes with a federal regulatory regime, while gambling in the U.S. is largely regulated state by state—meaning costly licenses, strict advertising rules, and, in several states, outright bans. It is within platforms’ interest to be treated as a derivatives market rather than a gambling site.

Futures derivatives markets are seen as tools for price discovery, risk management, and information aggregation, while gambling is seen as entertainment with elevated consumer-protection concerns. Prediction market platforms argue their contracts resemble financial derivatives: prices reflect probabilities, traders hedge risks, and markets generate useful signals for businesses, policymakers, and media.

But sentiments against gambling are much stronger in Asian countries compared to the U.S.. It is much harder to convince regulators in Asia that prediction market platforms are financial sites when they behave akin to gambling operators. In most Asian countries, gambling is illegal by default. There are narrow exceptions—wagering is permitted only when it is state-run. That is the case in China, South Korea, and Thailand, to name a few.

The Cat-and-Mouse Game

Historically, legal rulings have not been effective to stop people from wagering, if they want to.

In South Korea, during the constitutional court’s impeachment ruling of then-president Yoon Suk Yeol in 2025, a wave of betting swept across the country, according to The Korea Herald. The phenomenon is reminiscent of the rise of illegal gambling sites during the impeachment of former president Park Geun-hye in 2017. Such forms of betting is illegal in South Korea. Individuals caught gambling can face a fine of up to 10 million won. For habitual gamblers, it’s 20 million won or a sentence of up to three years in prison.

With demands present, the clash between prediction markets and regulators has evolved into a familiar cat-and-mouse dynamic. Regulators would order internet service providers to block access, restrict payment rails, remove apps from official app stores, and issue public warnings on criminal liability for operators and users alike. Platforms, in turn, adapt without directly confronting the law. Many operate through offshore entities or maintain deliberately opaque headquarters.

Take the case of Opinion, the previously-mentioned prediction market platform where the fate of the South Korean girl group New Jeans were being wagered. It was used by Korean users, but its launch press release, dated 16 October 2025, was issued from Hong Kong. It is unclear whether the platform is headquartered there. The same goes for PredicXion, a prediction market targeting the Asia Pacific market. Its launch press release, dated 26 June 2025, was issued from Tokyo. It is also unclear whether the company is based there. Prediction market YesNoMarket was launched on 24 November 2025. According to publicly-available LinkedIn information, its CEO is based in Singapore. The platform itself aims to serve the Chinese market.

The prediction market in Asia remains to be an interesting case, wherein platforms may not be officially available yet remain informally used.

It looks like in Asia, prediction markets are likely to remain locked in a prolonged cat-and-mouse game with regulators. Sentiments against gambling are less likely to change, and the local players have yet to make a strong case for themselves that they should be considered as a futures derivatives market instead.

Their prospects hinge on whether they can reshape public perception, and that’s a tough bet.

Asia Tech Lens

Discussion about this post

Ready for more?