Prediction Markets: Hyperliquid Outcome Contracts vs Polymarket and Kalshi

Quicknode

June 11, 2026 — 9 min read

Share

Add as preferred source

Prediction markets used to be easy to categorize.

Kalshi was the regulated one, Polymarket was the more crypto-native one, and everyone else was building in their shadow.

Despite their differences, both built markets around the same idea: trade the probability of future events.

This map changed in 2026.

In May 2026, Hyperliquid launched HIP-4, which added outcome contracts native to HyperCore. Kalshi's own head of crypto co-wrote it, and it settled about $6M on day one.

This pops up a million questions:

> Are these outcome contracts a prediction market clone?
> Why is Hyperliquid, the #1 perpetual DEX, suddenly doing this?
> Are Polymarket and Kalshi competing with Hyperliquid?

Let's answer them one by one.

First, let's look at how prediction markets work, how the platforms differ, and why those differences matter.

What Are Prediction Markets?

Prediction markets are exchanges where people trade contracts on the probability of a future event or outcome.

A standard market asks a binary question: Will the Federal Reserve cut interest rates in September?

From there, it's simple price discovery. People buy and sell contracts based on their predictions until the event ends and the market settles.

Here’s a simple snapshot:

These simple prediction and settlement mechanics are the base that drove $63.5 billion in prediction market volume in 2025.

So with Polymarket and Kalshi leading the market, why did Hyperliquid, the largest perpetual DEX, decide prediction markets were worth building?

Let’s learn.

Current Approaches to Building Prediction Markets

At first glance, all prediction markets look the same. Traders bet on future outcomes, prices move as new information arrives, and contracts eventually settle.

Surface-level, yes.

But under the hood, each platform is different: who can join, how markets resolve, where liquidity builds, and what developers can build on top.

To understand what Hyperliquid is doing with HIP-4 and outcome contracts, it helps to start with the current leaders: Polymarket and Kalshi.

How Polymarket Works

Polymarket built prediction markets as information markets.

Polymarket runs on Polygon, uses USDC as collateral, and resolves markets through UMA, an optimistic oracle. With UMA, outcomes can be disputed before they're final. Most users worldwide can trade without KYC or a brokerage account. That's a big reason it reached $9 billion in market volume in April 2026.

Polymarket's product is its range of markets.

Politics was its breakout category, but it grew naturally into global sports, geopolitics, economic milestones, and macro events.

The tradeoff: information markets need a way to decide what's true.

Polymarket resolves markets through UMA's optimistic oracle. That adds dispute windows and, when outcomes are unclear, the occasional controversy.

How Kalshi Works

Kalshi built regulated event markets within the framework of US financial regulation.

As a CFTC-regulated exchange, Kalshi offers event contracts with familiar interfaces, fiat deposits, and the same compliance standards as traditional finance apps.

A central board resolves its markets, and it reaches users through Robinhood.

Kalshi is easier to access and participate in.

Users don't need wallets, stablecoins, or any knowledge of oracles to take part. The platform grew from politics and macro events into sports, which now drives most of its trading.

Kalshi's limits come from its focus on regulation.

Every new market has to clear regulatory guardrails, and users trade inside a closed system instead of composable onchain infrastructure.

It's also less transparent, since a central board decides how markets settle and resolve.

Zooming out: Polymarket proved people would trade on information. Kalshi proved they'd do it on regulated rails.

Hyperliquid didn't need to solve either problem. It already had traders, liquidity, and one of the deepest derivatives venues in crypto.

So, how did Hyperliquid approach building outcome contracts?

Understanding Hyperliquid Outcome Contracts

Hyperliquid didn't build a standalone prediction market.

HIP-4 added outcome contracts as a native instrument inside HyperCore. That's the same engine that runs its perpetual futures markets.

Outcome contracts became one more instrument for users already trading perps, managing collateral, and taking directional views.

For example, a trader who's long BTC can also bet on BTC's year-end price from the same account, using the same collateral.

Polymarket and Kalshi can't do this.

Each is a standalone venue. Prediction market positions sit apart from the rest of a trader's portfolio.

Let's look at each piece in more detail.

What are Hyperliquid Outcome Contracts and How Do They Work

Outcome contracts are binary instruments tied to a specific event.

Each contract settles to either 0 or 1, depending on whether the stated outcome happens.

Say a contract asks, "Will the Federal Reserve keep rates unchanged in September?" If the answer is yes, YES holders get a payout of 1 and the NO side settles to 0.

HIP-4 uses a single merged YES/NO order book. Buying YES at price P is the same as selling NO at 1 minus P, so both sides share one liquidity pool.

Learn more about HIP-4 and outcome contracts here

Why Hyperliquid Chose a Derivatives Model

Hyperliquid already had traders, liquidity, and an exchange handling billions of dollars in volume on one trading engine.

Building outcome contracts inside HyperCore meant users didn't have to bridge assets, open new accounts, or learn a new interface to trade predictions.

The same collateral behind perp positions could back outcome contracts, and the same matching engine could price them.

Why Developers Should Care About HIP-4

HIP-4 and outcome contracts take Hyperliquid beyond prediction markets.

Developers can watch new outcomes with outcomeMeta, track validator votes with validatorL1Votes, and follow settlement with settledOutcome.

This lets developers build products where prediction market positions share margin with perp exposure, like trading bots, macro hedges, and event-driven strategies. Today, these combined products are only possible on Hyperliquid.

Hyperliquid's bet is that event contracts belong inside trading infrastructure. HIP-4 gives developers the building blocks to test that.

Now that we've covered Hyperliquid's product, approach, and potential, let's compare it with the two leading platforms.

Key Differences Between Hyperliquid, Polymarket, and Kalshi

Hyperliquid, Polymarket, and Kalshi all let users trade future outcomes. That's mostly where the similarities end.

Underneath, they make different choices about trust, settlement, collateral, access, and what prediction markets should become.

The table below captures those distinctions.

Of course, no single approach wins on every front.

Each one answers the same question differently: what should prediction markets optimize for?

The answer will shape where the category goes next.

So where do prediction markets go from here?

The Future of Prediction Markets

Prediction markets are maturing into information infrastructure. And there may not be a single winner.

People who want to see what the market thinks about a niche geopolitical event may stick with Polymarket. Traders who need a regulated setting may prefer Kalshi. Active traders already managing risk on an exchange may find Hyperliquid's approach more natural.

The bigger takeaway is that prediction markets are growing beyond a category of their own.

The winners will be the platforms that build these features into the systems people already trust and use.

FAQs: Frequently Asked Questions

Are Hyperliquid outcome contracts prediction markets?

Yes. Outcome contracts are binary instruments tied to future events, and they settle based on whether a stated outcome happens. The difference is how they're offered. Hyperliquid builds them into an existing derivatives exchange instead of a standalone prediction platform.

How are Hyperliquid outcome contracts different from Polymarket?

Polymarket treats prediction markets as information markets. Hyperliquid treats event contracts as one more trading instrument next to perpetual futures.

The key structural differences are:

• Composability: HIP-4 allows shared margin, and Polymarket doesn't.

• Order book design: HIP-4 uses one merged YES/NO book, and Polymarket uses separate token books.

• Resolution model.

How are Hyperliquid outcome contracts different from Kalshi?

Kalshi is a CFTC-regulated event exchange with fiat rails and mainstream access. Hyperliquid is crypto-native and built for composability and trading efficiency. One puts regulatory certainty first. The other puts capital efficiency and fit with wider trading workflows first.

Why did Hyperliquid launch HIP-4?

HIP-4 reflects Hyperliquid's view that prediction markets don't need to be separate destinations. Event contracts can sit next to spot and derivatives products in the same trading environment.

How do Hyperliquid outcome contracts settle?

Markets settle to 0 or 1, depending on whether the stated outcome happens. Resolution rules are set when the market is created, and Hyperliquid validators take part in settlement through the protocol's native process.

Are prediction markets legal?

It depends on the jurisdiction and the platform. Kalshi operates under CFTC oversight in the US. Crypto-native platforms like Polymarket and Hyperliquid face different rules depending on where users are.

Which prediction market platform is most accurate?

Based on available data, Kalshi.

A 2025 Vanderbilt study found Kalshi was 78% accurate, versus 67% for Polymarket, in the 2024 US presidential election. The gap reflects Kalshi's central resolution board and position size limits, which reduce how much large traders can move prices.

HIP-4 is too new to have comparable accuracy data.

Building on Hyperliquid with Quicknode

Quicknode offers managed Hyperliquid RPC endpoints, data access, and developer tools, so teams can focus on building their products.

Quicknode's HyperCore integration, now in public beta, includes:

• Streams support for Hypercore datasets, enabling filtered, push-based delivery of Hyperliquid data

• gRPC APIs designed for high-volume, low-latency data pipelines

• JSON-RPC and WebSocket-related methods for compatibility with existing workflows

View current pricing: https://www.quicknode.com/api-credits/hyperliquid

More Quicknode resources for Hyperliquid builders:

1. Hyperliquid API Overview | Quicknode Docs

2. Build a Real-Time Hyperliquid Whale Alert Bot

3. Read HyperCore Oracle Prices in HyperEVM

4. Real-time risk monitoring and liquidation analytics API for HyperLend Protocol on Hyperliquid

5. Comparison of the top 6 Hyperliquid RPC providers for HyperCore and HyperEVM

SDKs & Tools

• Hyperliquid Python SDK — also on PyPI

• Hyperliquid API Examples — clone-and-run examples in Python, TypeScript, Rust & Go

• Hyperliquid SDK Examples — advanced SDK usage patterns

• HyperCore CLI — stream & backfill HyperCore data from the terminal

• hyperliquidapi.com — zero-custody Hyperliquid trading API

For teams building on HIP-4, infrastructure is the difference between a product that works when it matters and one that doesn't.