#预测市场 After reading Coinbase and major institutions' outlooks for 2026, a familiar feeling arises. The comparison between 1996 and 1999 makes me think of the internet bubble on the eve of its burst—back then, the atmosphere was similar, with everyone discussing infrastructure improvements, clear policy frameworks, and institutional entry in large numbers, as if history were repeating itself.

The most interesting part is the prediction market. This sector is shifting from the fringe to focus, and the underlying logic is worth pondering. Changes in tax policies drive user migration, aggregators become the dominant interface, and weekly trading volumes surge to billions of dollars—I've seen this logic before. Remember the ICO boom of 2017? Today’s prediction markets are like tokenomics back then—seemingly innovative but actually just a packaging upgrade of the old cycle.

What concerns me more are DAT 2.0 and the shift in token economics. Moving from pure narrative to income-linked, from asset accumulation to sovereignty in blockchain space trading—this is not a small change; it’s a paradigm shift. But that’s also where the risk lies. History has shown me that whenever we claim "this time is different," it’s often the moment to be most cautious.

The expectations of stablecoins reaching $1.2 trillion, the irreversible process of institutionalization, and the deepening involvement of traditional capital—all are valid points. The question is, when all institutions are looking in the same direction, how much has the market already priced in? The four-year cycle divergence precisely illustrates this: no one truly sees clearly.

2026 seems more like a year of validation. Validating whether policy frameworks can truly be implemented, whether institutional commitments will materialize, and whether prediction markets can break through liquidity constraints. Let’s wait and see.