Some prediction markets operate under older "no-action letters" that let them bypass traditional brokers (FCMs). This creates a regulatory gap, as stringent marketing and advertising rules that apply to FCMs do not cover these direct-to-exchange platforms, leading to inconsistent standards for consumer-facing communication.
Related Insights
The CFTC views informational advantages in prediction markets, like knowing about a secret Super Bowl ad, as a form of insider trading. The agency confirms it has legal authority under its anti-fraud rule, similar to the SEC's, to surveil markets and prosecute such cases, extending the doctrine beyond traditional corporate securities.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Prediction market platforms are promoting their products as 'CFTC-approved,' but this is misleading. They use a self-certification process where the CFTC has 24 hours to object. A lack of objection is not an endorsement, a critical distinction that CME's CEO argues is not being disclosed to retail users.
While traditional sports betting is restricted in many areas, prediction markets like Kalshi are often regulated as commodity markets. This arbitrage allows them to legally offer wagering on sports outcomes in most states, effectively operating as back-door sportsbooks and reaching a national audience.
By framing sports wagers as financial derivatives, prediction markets fall under federal CFTC jurisdiction. This allows them to operate with a lower age limit for trading (often 18) than state-level gambling laws (often 21), creating a de facto national standard that can circumvent local policy choices.