Though functionally similar to users, prediction markets and sports betting operate under different regulatory frameworks. Prediction markets are lightly regulated by the federal government, while sports betting is heavily regulated state-by-state. This distinction allows prediction markets to legally operate in jurisdictions where sports betting is banned, fueling rapid growth.

Related Insights

Prediction markets are not just for betting. They are becoming a valuable source of predictive data for enterprises, as shown by new partnerships with media giants like CNN and CNBC. This dual-purpose model, functioning as both a consumer product and a B2B data service, creates two distinct revenue streams.

The explosive growth of prediction markets is driven by regulatory arbitrage. They capture immense value from the highly-regulated sports betting industry by operating under different, less restrictive rules for 'prediction markets,' despite significant product overlap.

New platforms frame betting on future events as sophisticated 'trading,' akin to stock markets. This rebranding as 'prediction markets' helps them bypass traditional gambling regulations and attract users who might otherwise shun betting, positioning it as an intellectual or financial activity rather than a game of chance.

Traditional sports betting allows insiders to exploit static odds. In a liquid prediction market, a large bet based on inside information immediately moves the odds, reflecting that knowledge in the price and eliminating the arbitrage opportunity for the insider.

While often promoted as tools for information discovery, the primary business opportunity for prediction markets is cannibalizing the massive sports betting industry. The high-volume, high-engagement nature of sports gambling is the engine to acquire customers and professional market makers, with other "informational" markets being a secondary concern.

Prediction markets have existed for decades. Their recent popularity surge isn't due to a technological breakthrough but to success in legalizing them. The primary obstacle was always legal prohibition, not a lack of product-market fit or superior technology.

Prediction markets are accelerating their normalization by integrating directly into established ecosystems. Partnerships with Google, Robinhood, and the NYSE's owner embed gambling-like activities into everyday financial and informational tools, lowering barriers to entry and lending them legitimacy.

Kalshi’s key strategic move was getting its prediction markets regulated by the federal CFTC, similar to commodities. This established federal preemption, meaning state-level laws don't apply. This allowed them to operate nationwide with a single regulator instead of seeking approval in 50 different states.

While gaining traction, prediction markets are on a collision course with regulators. Their expansion into domains resembling sports betting is unsustainable without government oversight and revenue sharing. The current "lawless" phase, where they claim not to be gambling, is unlikely to last, leading to a stalled 2026.

Donald Trump's idea to eliminate taxes on gambling winnings has an overlooked nuance. Due to an existing tax law that limits deducting gambling losses, professional bettors on sportsbooks are disadvantaged. Making winnings tax-free would disproportionately benefit traders on prediction markets where losses can be fully deducted, shifting activity to those platforms.