jili tutorial

Search Attention vs. Trading Volume: How Polymarket and Kalshi Split the Prediction Market Spotlight in 2026

By jili tutorial · September 30, 2026

Search Attention vs. Trading Volume: How Polymarket and Kalshi Split the Prediction Market Spotlight in 2026

Introduction: Two Leaders, Two Very Different Scoreboards

In the rapidly evolving world of U.S. prediction markets, there is more than one way to measure success. A brand can dominate in name recognition while a competitor quietly processes far more dollars in actual trades. That is exactly the situation playing out between Polymarket and Kalshi in 2026, according to new data from Blask, an analytics firm focused on the iGaming and betting sector.

The data reveals a fundamental tension: Polymarket remains the brand that U.S. consumers search for most often, but Kalshi is winning where it counts financially — actual trading volume. Understanding the gap between these two metrics, why it exists, and what it means for the broader prediction market industry requires a closer look at the data, the methodology behind it, and the behavior of the consumers involved.

This guide breaks down the Blask findings, explains the key concepts, and explores what the attention-versus-volume divide reveals about the current state of U.S. prediction markets.

The Core Finding: A Split Personality in the Market

Blask tracked branded search demand for prediction markets between January and August 2026. The headline result: Polymarket and Kalshi are heading in opposite directions on the attention front, even as Kalshi extends its lead in trading activity.

Polymarket, the more internationally recognizable brand, began the year with a commanding lead in branded search attention. Kalshi, the federally regulated competitor that has aggressively courted U.S. sports and election markets, spent the year closing that gap month after month.

But here is the twist: Kalshi’s trading volume is already dramatically higher. In August 2026, Kalshi recorded $37.17 billion in trading volume, compared with a combined $8.16 billion across Polymarket and Polymarket US, according to data cited from The Block. That means Kalshi processed roughly four and a half times the volume of its better-known rival. Yet consumers are still searching for Polymarket in greater numbers.

As Blask put it: “Trading volume is a liquidity/execution metric; BAP is an attention metric.”

What Is BAP and How Does Blask Measure Attention?

Defining the Brand’s Accumulated Power (BAP) Metric

Blask’s central tool is the Brand’s Accumulated Power (BAP) metric. BAP measures a brand’s share of total branded search demand within a defined category — in this case, U.S. prediction markets. It is not a measure of users, revenue, or trades. It is a measure of how much consumer attention, as expressed through web searches, is flowing to each brand.

The Blask Index Explained

Alongside BAP, Blask uses the Blask Index, a broader indicator of overall search demand for a given segment. The Index rises and falls with the raw volume of branded searches, allowing analysts to see not just who is winning share, but whether the entire category is growing or contracting. The Index can also be filtered to isolate prediction-market-specific searches, which becomes particularly useful when evaluating large multi-product operators.

Methodology: How Blask Filters the Noise

Blask’s approach combines geo-tagged search data with contextual filtering. The company says this filtering is designed to isolate betting- or trading-related queries and remove searches that are irrelevant or motivated by negative intent. This is an important step: not every search for a brand name reflects a potential trader. Some people search for a company to check whether it is legitimate, to complain about it, or to read news — none of which is a signal of trading interest. Blask’s methodology attempts to strip those out.

The January–August 2026 Search Scoreboard

The numbers tell a clear story of convergence.

Among those smaller players, Novig posted the fastest January-to-July increase in Blask Index, rising 64.9%. While still a minor player in absolute terms, Novig’s growth signals that the market is not entirely a two-horse race.

The World Cup: A Turning Point for Kalshi’s Search Presence

The most dramatic shift in search attention occurred during the 2026 World Cup. The tournament, which traditionally draws enormous sports-betting interest, provided Kalshi with a surge of consumer visibility.

Blask’s month-by-month BAP figures illustrate the shift:

MonthKalshi BAPPolymarket BAP
May18%80%
June29%69%
July36%61%

By August, Kalshi’s BAP reached 35.8% . Polymarket, while still ahead, had seen its advantage shrink considerably from the start of the year.

Importantly, Kalshi’s gains were not merely the result of Polymarket losing share in a shrinking market. Blask found that Kalshi’s Blask Index increased by 22.8% between January and July, even as the overall prediction-market segment contracted by 22% over the same period. In other words, Kalshi was attracting more branded search demand in absolute terms, not just relative to its rival. This suggests the World Cup, combined with Kalshi’s broader marketing push, genuinely expanded its visibility among U.S. consumers.

Trading Volume Tells a Different Story

Kalshi’s Dominance in Dollar Terms

If search attention is one side of the coin, trading volume is the other — and here, Kalshi is firmly in the lead.

In August 2026, Kalshi recorded $37.17 billion in volume. Polymarket and Polymarket US combined for just $8.16 billion, according to The Block. That is a significant gap, and it widened considerably during the World Cup.

Reuters reported that Kalshi generated approximately $27 billion in trading volume during the World Cup itself. Other estimates have been lower, depending on what is counted. TickerTracker, for example, calculated approximately $13.8 billion across Kalshi’s individual World Cup markets, excluding combination markets. Regardless of which estimate is closer, the scale of Kalshi’s trading surge was unprecedented.

July 2026: The Biggest Month Yet

The broader monthly data underscores just how large the prediction market surge has been. Pew Research Center, analyzing The Block data, put combined Kalshi and Polymarket trading volume at nearly $53 billion in July 2026. Of that total, Kalshi accounted for roughly $40.1 billion, while Polymarket and Polymarket US combined for about $12.9 billion.

That means Kalshi alone handled more than three times the combined volume of Polymarket’s platforms during the peak month of the World Cup. For all of Polymarket’s search attention dominance, it is Kalshi that is moving the real money.

Why the Gap Exists: Name Recognition vs. Active Usage

The Name-Recognition Effect

Polymarket’s edge in search attention is, in large part, a function of brand equity. The platform launched earlier, received substantially more international media coverage, and is often the default answer when casual observers think about prediction markets. It has become something of a genericized term — the “Kleenex” or “Xerox” of its category.

As Blask told Gambling Insider: “Polymarket’s edge is largely a name-recognition effect: it’s the more established, more globally-covered brand, so it pulls more search attention per user even where Kalshi is winning more of the actual money.”

This distinction is crucial. Search attention measures how often people think about a brand. It does not measure how often they trade on it. A user can search for Polymarket out of curiosity, read a news article about it, and never place a trade. Meanwhile, a Kalshi user who has already installed the app can trade repeatedly without ever performing a search for the brand again.

The Customer Journey Problem

Blask believes the discrepancy reflects different stages of consumer engagement. A large share of World Cup trading volume likely came from users who were already acquired and active — people placing more bets and trades without needing to search for the brand again to do so.

In contrast, branded search captures a different stage of the journey: the moment of discovery or consideration. A person who has heard about a prediction market but has not yet signed up is far more likely to search for its name than someone who is already actively trading on a daily basis.

Blask described the difference as the gap between “more people are discovering/considering this” and “existing users are trading more.”

The March Peak: Midterm Primaries Outperform the World Cup

One of the most intriguing findings in the Blask data is that the year’s largest single-day spike in prediction-market search demand had nothing to do with the World Cup.

Instead, the Blask Index reached its 2026 peak on March 2 — the day before the first midterm primaries in Texas, North Carolina, and Arkansas. That day’s Index was more than four times a mid-May baseline. Super Bowl Sunday exceeded the same baseline by more than 3 times, while the highest World Cup reading reached only about half the March 2 level.

This is a striking result. The World Cup generated far more trading volume, but the midterm primary season generated more search attention. Blask cautioned, however, that it cannot establish causation. The company noted:

“The primaries link is a timing inference — the spike lands exactly on that date — not a query-level breakdown proving people were searching with election intent specifically.”

In other words, the safest conclusion is that the year’s largest branded-search spike coincided with the opening of the primary calendar, not necessarily that political markets definitively caused it. Still, the pattern aligns with the broader narrative that election-driven prediction market interest remains a powerful driver of consumer attention.

The World Cup’s Sustained (If Less Dramatic) Lift

While the World Cup did not produce the year’s biggest single-day search spike, it generated a more sustained elevation in demand. Blask found that median daily prediction-market Index levels during the six-week tournament were 38% above the four weeks before kickoff.

That sustained lift becomes even more notable when compared with traditional iGaming. Over the same comparison period, Blask’s traditional U.S. iGaming measure was just 2% lower. This suggests that prediction markets, not sportsbooks, were the primary driver of sports-related search attention during the tournament — a major shift in the consumer landscape.

App Downloads: A Different Kind of Growth

Search data, however, only tells part of the story. Separate mobile app data from Sensor Tower suggests the World Cup brought a substantial number of new users into prediction markets — even if those users did not arrive via branded web searches.

During the World Cup’s opening three weeks, Kalshi’s average weekly downloads were nearly twice its Super Bowl LX level. Polymarket’s were nearly four times higher. Sensor Tower described prediction markets as the primary driver of growth among U.S. sports-wagering apps during the period.

Similarly, Apptopia reported continued growth in prediction-market apps during the tournament, with rising daily active users even as sportsbook app growth began to retreat.

This data matters because it challenges the assumption that search attention and trading volume are the only two relevant metrics. Many new users are discovering prediction markets through app stores, advertising, referrals, and social media — none of which generate the branded web searches that Blask captures. Conversely, a user who has installed an app can trade repeatedly without ever performing another search for the brand.

The Customer Funnel: Discovery, Acquisition, Engagement

Putting it all together, the prediction market landscape can be understood as a three-stage funnel:

  1. Discovery (Attention) — Captured by metrics like BAP and the Blask Index. This reflects how many people are thinking about, searching for, or considering a brand.
  2. Acquisition (Downloads) — Captured by app store data from Sensor Tower and Apptopia. This reflects how many people are actively taking steps to engage with a platform.
  3. Engagement (Trading Volume) — Captured by trading volume figures from The Block and similar sources. This reflects how much actual money is being put to work on a platform.

Each metric measures a different stage of the customer journey, and each can tell a different story. Polymarket leads in discovery. Sensor Tower’s data suggests it may also be holding its own in acquisition. But Kalshi is the clear winner in engagement.

The Key Caveat: Is Share of Search a Reliable Proxy?

There is an important limitation to the Blask methodology that readers should keep in mind. The company’s approach is based on Share of Search (SoS) — a brand’s share of search demand relative to competitors. In traditional iGaming, Blask says its own testing found a 95% correlation between search share and actual market performance. That is an impressive figure, and it underpins the company’s confidence in its methodology.

However, Blask has not yet tested whether the same relationship holds for prediction markets. As the company acknowledged:

“Whether SoS-to-performance holds for prediction-market trading volume specifically is an open question we haven’t run the study on yet, not one we’re claiming a yes or no on.”

That is an important caveat. It means the BAP data should be treated as a measure of consumer attention and brand health — not as a direct predictor of trading volume or market share. The two can diverge, and in this case, they clearly do.

Key Takeaways for Observers and Operators

Conclusion: A Tale of Two Metrics

The 2026 prediction market data offers a fascinating case study in how brand attention and trading activity can diverge. Polymarket has won the battle for consumer mindshare, but Kalshi is winning the battle for actual dollars. Each metric tells a meaningful part of the story — but neither tells the whole story on its own.

For industry observers, the lesson is clear: when evaluating prediction market operators, look at the full picture. Search data reveals who is top of mind. App download data reveals who is acquiring new users. Trading volume reveals who is actually moving the money. Any single one of these metrics, taken in isolation, gives an incomplete — and potentially misleading — view of the market.

As the sector continues to mature, the gap between attention and execution is likely to narrow or shift. Kalshi’s sustained gains in search demand suggest its volume dominance is translating into broader brand recognition. Meanwhile, Polymarket’s enduring name recognition means it will remain a powerful player even as competitors close the gap. For consumers, the takeaway is simpler: whether you are searching, downloading, or trading, the prediction market landscape in 2026 offers more choice — and more competition — than ever before.