Midterm Elections

Every Crypto Coin Show story tagged Midterm Elections, newest first, alongside the guides and interviews that give it context.

Newsletter

Jul 22, 2026

Equities

Kalshi launches Midterms Hub where users can follow how money is moving in markets related to this fall’s midterm elections

Crypto Coin Show News Team Equities Election Forecasting, Election Trading, Kalshi, Market Data, Midterm Elections, Political Betting, Prediction Markets

EquitiesJuly 22, 2026·5 min read

Kalshi’s new Midterms Hub provides institutional and retail traders with real-time access to prediction market pricing on U.S. Senate, House, and gubernatorial races, creating a transparent window into market expectations ahead of November’s elections. The move expands the utility of legally sanctioned election betting markets, which have demonstrated predictive accuracy of roughly 75 percent in recent contests, offering an alternative data source to traditional polling for institutional investors monitoring political risk.

Kalshi’s Midterms Hub aggregates real-time election market odds alongside FEC campaign finance data, polling averages, and curated political news in a single public interface.
Prediction market accuracy in 2024 primaries reached approximately 75 percent when candidates held odds between 70-80 percent, validated by Washington Post analysis of hundreds of contests.
Election-related trading volume on Kalshi has approached $200 million, driven by 24/7 market operation and court approval of federal election wagering in 2024.

75% Accuracy rate of prediction markets versus traditional polls in 2024 primary races
$200M Estimated trading volume on Kalshi’s platform related to midterm elections
75% Proportion of Kalshi users who view markets without placing trades themselves

Kalshi, a federally regulated financial exchange, launched its Midterms Hub this week to provide public access to real-time pricing data from prediction markets covering the November midterm elections.

The platform allows users to track where real-money traders are positioning bets across U.S. Senate, House, and gubernatorial races nationwide, creating what the company describes as one of the most comprehensive public windows into trader expectations for Election Day outcomes.

The hub integrates election market odds with Federal Election Commission campaign finance disclosures, polling averages, curated political news, and historical election results by state and congressional district, allowing users to compare traditional polling sentiment against market-implied probabilities in real time.

Kalshi’s Hub Integrates Market Odds with FEC Filings and Polling Data

The Midterms Hub is designed for four user groups: voters seeking current election information, journalists and researchers tracking political developments, campaign operatives monitoring competitor positioning, and institutional market participants analyzing political risk.

By consolidating multiple data streams, polling, market pricing, and campaign finance, the platform enables cross-referencing of different signals.

Users can observe, for instance, whether a candidate receiving strong grassroots funding (measured by the percentage of contributions under $200) is also gaining odds support in prediction markets, or whether polling leads match market confidence levels.

The platform’s real-time pricing updates whenever news breaks, candidates make statements, or debate outcomes are digested by traders. Markets operate 24/7, meaning odds adjust continuously rather than only during traditional trading hours, providing a more granular view of sentiment shifts.

According to Kalshi, approximately 75 percent of users who visit the platform view market contracts without placing trades themselves, indicating substantial demand for election market data as a research and intelligence tool rather than as a betting venue.

Prediction Markets Achieved 75 Percent Accuracy in 2024 Primary Elections

Kalshi’s credibility as a data source depends substantially on demonstrated predictive accuracy. In 2024, the company claims that traders’ favored candidates won nine of ten elections tested across a three-month window leading up to contests.

The Washington Post independently validated this track record by examining hundreds of 2024 primary races on the platform and found that when candidates held odds between 70 and 80 percent, a range indicating strong but not overwhelming market confidence, approximately 75 percent of those candidates ultimately won their races.

This accuracy rate exceeds many traditional polling methodologies, which frequently miscalibrate final margins and upset potential in primary contests. The distinction matters for institutional investors because prediction markets aggregate financially motivated forecasts rather than poll respondents’ stated preferences.

Tarek Mansour, Kalshi’s CEO and a former Citadel trader and Goldman Sachs analyst educated at MIT, argues that markets are harder to distort with partisan messaging than traditional opinion polls or political commentary, since traders risk capital on their predictions.

Prediction markets offer a clearer view of election expectations by reflecting financially backed forecasts rather than political rhetoric.

Tarek Mansour, CEO of Kalshi

The distinction between prediction market accuracy and polling error has acquired institutional relevance as asset managers and political risk specialists increasingly incorporate election outcomes into portfolio construction and hedging decisions.

Election Wagering Volume Approaches $200 Million Following 2024 Court Ruling

Kalshi’s expansion of its election trading platform follows a critical legal development: a 2024 court ruling that permitted Americans to place wagers on federal elections. Prior to that decision, election betting markets were constrained by regulatory ambiguity and legal risk, limiting both volume and participation.

The court approval removed these barriers, and Kalshi has captured the emerging market share, with midterm election-related trading volume now approaching $200 million on its platform alone.

The company previously launched the American Power Index, also known as KPOW, in May of this year, designed as a political analogue to the S&P 500. The index combines current control of government with trader expectations about future political outcomes, displayed as a single figure on a scale ranging from plus-50 (full Democratic control) to plus-50 (full Republican control).

This index tool targets institutional clients seeking a single-number summary of political positioning.

Trading volume has grown rapidly, reflecting both increased awareness of legal election betting and Kalshi’s establishment as the primary regulated venue for such activity.

The Midterms Hub’s launch and the approaching $200 million in election trading volume signal that institutional and retail participants now view prediction markets as a mainstream political intelligence tool.

The critical open question is whether Kalshi’s data integration model, combining market odds, polling, FEC filings, and news, will become the standard reference point for political risk analysis across asset management, campaign finance, and media industries, or whether its use will remain concentrated among specialized traders.

November’s election results will provide a definitive test of whether the platform’s 75 percent accuracy rate in primary contests carries forward to general election races, where different voter coalitions and turnout dynamics apply.

Regulatory Arbitrage: How Federal Court Approval Unlocked Election Betting Scale

Kalshi’s ability to offer election markets at institutional scale reflects a significant shift in U.S. regulatory stance. In 2024, federal courts rejected the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s longstanding ban on election-linked derivatives, clearing the way for Kalshi to operate as a federally registered derivatives exchange.

This reversal created a legal foundation absent for nearly two decades, during which prediction market data remained fragmented across offshore platforms and academic research environments with limited real-money participation.

The regulatory opening has compressed adoption timelines dramatically. Kalshi’s election-related trading volume approached $200 million in the 2024 cycle, compared to cumulative volumes in the tens of millions across all U.S. prediction markets before 2024.

This expansion matters because market depth, the volume of real money wagered at various price points, directly correlates with forecast reliability. Thinner markets reward individual large bets and are prone to manipulation; deeper markets distribute risk across thousands of participants with heterogeneous information sets, pushing prices toward fundamental values.

The Midterms Hub launch tests whether institutional adoption will sustain beyond the novelty of legal access. Kalshi has disclosed that institutional clients now account for a meaningful but unspecified share of platform volume, though retail traders still dominate order flow by count. The coming months will reveal whether asset managers and hedge funds integrate election market pricing into systematic risk models, or whether trading remains concentrated among political enthusiasts and specialized bettors.

Get this in your inboxThe Crypto Coin Show newsletter covers the policy and market moves institutional crypto investors are pricing in.

May 17, 2026

Bitcoin

$33K Could Be Bitcoin’s Next Stop if History Repeats: Analyst

Crypto Coin Show News Team Bitcoin Bearish Sentiment, Bitcoin, Market Correction, Merlijn The Trader, Midterm Elections, Price Prediction, Technical Analysis

BitcoinMay 17, 2026·5 min read

A prominent on-chain analyst has identified a historical pattern spanning three U.S. midterm election cycles in which Bitcoin declined between 61% and 66% each time, suggesting a potential $33,000 floor if the cycle repeats in 2026. For institutional investors, such a move would represent a stress test of portfolio allocation assumptions and a validation point for macroeconomic correlation theses that link crypto to political cycles.

Bitcoin fell 61% in 2014, 65% in 2018, and 66% in 2022, all midterm election years, with zero exceptions across three cycles.
Analyst Merlijn The Trader calculates a worst-case target of $33,000 if the pattern repeats in 2026, or a less severe scenario between $45,000 and $59,000.
The $78,000 support level is critical to determining which decline scenario unfolds, as a breach would trigger the deeper downside targets.

61%, 65%, 66% Bitcoin’s average losses across three midterm election years compared to baseline.
$33,000 Worst-case downside target if midterm election cycle pattern repeats exactly.
$78,000 Key support level currently being tested; its breach would confirm deeper decline scenarios.

Bitcoin’s rejection at $82,000 this week and subsequent correction to $78,000 has triggered renewed bearish positioning across crypto markets, with analysts reassessing tail-risk scenarios.

The most striking thesis to emerge is not from macro sentiment or technical charts, but from a pattern buried in Bitcoin’s political calendar: every U.S. midterm election year since 2014 has coincided with severe Bitcoin declines, and the consistency is stark enough to warrant institutional attention.

Merlijn The Trader, a trader and analyst with a following on institutional research channels, has quantified this pattern in stark terms. Bitcoin fell 61% in 2014, 65% in 2018, and 66% in 2022, each a midterm election year, with what he describes as zero exceptions across three complete cycles.

The precision of these declines, clustering between 61% and 66%, suggests something more systematic than random market volatility.

Bitcoin’s Perfect Midterm Election Cycle Decline, Three Data Points, Zero Exceptions

The pattern Merlijn outlined identifies 2014, 2018, and 2022 as years in which Bitcoin experienced severe drawdowns aligned with U.S. midterm election dynamics. In 2014, the decline was 61%. In 2018, it deepened to 65%. In 2022, it reached 66%. The clustering of these figures within a 5-percentage-point band, rather than ranging widely, is the feature Merlijn emphasizes: “Three cycles.

Three dumps. Zero exceptions.”

If applied to 2026, the next midterm election year, and Bitcoin were positioned at $82,000 at cycle peak, a 61% to 66% decline would land the asset between $27,700 and $31,980. Merlijn’s published target of $33,000 sits within that band, assuming a ~60% drawdown from current levels.

For institutional portfolio managers operating under Value-at-Risk or stress-test frameworks, this scenario would require justification: does a political calendar correlation override technical support levels, on-chain accumulation signals, or macroeconomic fundamentals?

The analyst framed the pattern in declarative terms, noting that “the calendar has never been wrong.” This claim carries weight precisely because it ignores technical rebounds, bullish news flow, or regulatory tailwinds, all of which appeared in prior midterm years yet did not prevent the declines.

The implication is that Bitcoin may operate on a time cycle independent of conventional momentum analysis.

$45,000 to $59,000 Alternative: The 2021 Accumulation Phase Analog

Merlijn introduced a secondary scenario, less severe but still bearish, based on a 2021 price pattern that he argues Bitcoin may be replicating now. In this framework, Bitcoin moves through six distinct phases: early crash, capitulation, basing, accumulation, spring, and rally.

According to his analysis, Bitcoin currently occupies step 4, the accumulation phase, which preceded significant further downside before the eventual recovery.

Under this interpretation, Bitcoin would decline to a range between $45,000 and $59,000 before reversing, a more moderate outcome than the midterm cycle thesis but still a 40% to 45% drawdown from current prices. The difference between the two scenarios hinges on a single support level: $78,000.

If Bitcoin holds above $78,000, the 2021 analogy may be incorrect, and Merlijn’s accumulation phase thesis could be skipped entirely, bringing a bull scenario closer. If Bitcoin breaks below $78,000, the move activates the deeper downside targets within both scenarios.

This conditional framework matters to institutional traders because it ties a directional call to a specific price level that can be monitored in real time, rather than leaving investors to debate abstract pattern-matching.

The $78,000 level functions as a decision point: above it, the bear case weakens; below it, the bear case strengthens with two distinct downside corridors depending on whether the midterm cycle or 2021 accumulation pattern takes precedence.

Midterm Election Years as a Macro Regime Separate from Crypto Cycles

The political calendar theory introduces a regime that sits orthogonal to typical crypto cycle analysis, which focuses on halving events, network maturation, and macro risk-on/risk-off sentiment. Midterm election years introduce political uncertainty, shifts in fiscal spending, and potential regulatory shifts, all of which may depress risk asset demand regardless of Bitcoin-specific fundamentals.

In 2014, regulatory scrutiny intensified around Mt. Gox and early exchange licensing frameworks. In 2018, the SEC was active in reviewing Bitcoin ETF proposals and crypto lending products, generating uncertainty.

In 2022, the FTX collapse and subsequent regulatory backlash created a macro headwind that overlapped with the midterm cycle. It remains unclear whether the pattern is driven by regulation, macro sentiment, equity market declines, or pure calendar correlation, but the track record is undeniable.

For institutional investors, the question is whether this pattern reflects a genuine structural relationship or curve-fitting on limited data. With only three data points, the statistical significance remains low by academic standards, yet the consistency (61%, 65%, 66%) is precise enough to exclude chance.

A $33,000 target would imply institutional investors should allocate to downside hedges, reduce concentration in Bitcoin, or establish defensive positions heading into the 2026 midterm window, a material shift in positioning if the thesis is adopted.

Bullish Factors vs. the Calendar: Which Wins

Merlijn acknowledged that genuine bullish catalysts are emerging: the CLARITY Act, which would provide regulatory clarity for staking and proof-of-work activities, has advanced in legislative progress. Bilateral talks between the U.S. and China have shown signs of defrosting, which could ease trade tensions and support risk appetite more broadly.

For equities and commodities, such developments would typically outweigh seasonal or calendar-based headwinds.

Yet Merlijn’s core assertion was uncompromising: “the calendar has never been wrong.” This framing treats political time as a regime that overrides news flow and technical strength, a controversial position that splits the institutional research community.

Investors holding this thesis would argue that Bitcoin’s performance in 2014, 2018, and 2022 proves that regulatory clarity, geopolitical thaws, and corporate adoption were not sufficient to prevent declines in midterm years. Skeptics would counter that three data points do not establish causation, and that each 2014, 2018, and 2022 decline had distinct macro drivers (Mt.

Gox in 2014, Fed rate cycle in 2018, FTX and recession fears in 2022) unrelated to the calendar itself.

Support at $78,000 Remains the Immediate Test

The concrete near-term question is whether

Get this in your inboxThe Crypto Coin Show newsletter covers the policy and market moves institutional crypto investors are pricing in.