Prediction Market Giants Clash as Competition Between Kalshi and Polymarket Heats Up

marsbitPubblicato 2026-04-02Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-04-02

Introduzione

The competition between US-based prediction market platforms Kalshi and Polymarket has intensified, with both companies exchanging sharp public criticisms. Kalshi, which is regulated by the CFTC, launched an ad campaign in Washington, D.C., with slogans such as "We don’t do death markets," directly targeting Polymarket’s offshore operations and its controversial contracts related to military conflicts and sensitive events. Kalshi accused Polymarket of being "irresponsible, dangerous, and non-compliant," while Polymarket responded by calling for fact-based discussions and emphasizing its commitment to market integrity. The dispute highlights fundamental differences in their regulatory approaches and comes amid growing scrutiny over insider trading and ethical concerns in the prediction market industry, which has seen combined weekly volumes nearing $6 billion.

Written by: Yash Roy, Bloomberg

Compiled by: Saoirse, Foresight News

This is an advertisement placed by the American prediction market platform Kalshi at a Washington bus stop in March. With the slogan 'We Don't Do Death Markets,' it emphasizes its own federally regulated compliance to attack its competitor Polymarket's unregulated overseas operations and sensitive contracts related to military conflicts. Photographer: Daniel Hoyle / Bloomberg

As competition in the prediction market industry intensifies and this emerging field faces strict regulatory scrutiny in Washington, Kalshi and Polymarket are exchanging heavy accusations in a fierce confrontation.

The two platforms have frequently clashed before, but recent conflicts have escalated completely — Kalshi launched a highly targeted advertising campaign, and its employees have publicly criticized Polymarket, with the rhetoric from both sides becoming increasingly heated.

Benjamin Freeman, who is responsible for political and election markets at Kalshi, posted on social media on Monday, stating: 'Polymarket's irresponsible, dangerous, and allegedly违规的行为 (non-compliant behavior) is threatening the survival of legitimate prediction markets in the United States.'

This accusation quickly sparked a fierce war of words between the two companies.

Polymarket responded in a statement: 'We welcome competition but believe discussions should be based on facts. Misleading the public only harms the entire industry and its participants.'

Kalshi spokesperson Elisabeth Diana directly retorted: 'It's laughable to hear this from a company whose vast majority of trading volume is on an unregulated overseas platform, with rules that even allow for 'death markets'.'

(Note: Death Markets is a general term in the prediction market industry for trading contracts that directly/indirectly bet on events related to death, military conflicts, assassinations, etc., also known as 'assassination markets.')

This internal strife erupts at a critical time when Polymarket and Kalshi are vying for the leading position in the rapidly growing prediction market industry. This industry provides Americans with a new way to bet on various events, from sports games to election outcomes. According to data compiled by a user on Dune Analytics, the two startups have recently set new records in weekly trading volume, with their combined nominal trading volume recently approaching $6 billion.

Prediction Market Trading Volume Reaches Billions

Weekly nominal trading volume of Polymarket and Kalshi. Note: Data is for the week ending March 9th. Source: @datadashboards on Dune Analytics

The core of the dispute lies in the fundamental differences in the establishment models and operating rules of the trading platforms. The Kalshi platform is headquartered in the United States and is regulated by the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC); Polymarket's main trading platform is based overseas.

Polymarket leverages its overseas operational advantage to list contracts related to military conflicts, including those involving Iran. Kalshi directly states that such products are both unethical and illegal.

One of Kalshi's advertisements bluntly states: 'We Don't Do Death Markets.'

Earlier this week, this set of marketing ads from Kalshi, in the form of a 'platform rules list,' began appearing at bus stops and subway stations in Washington.

One of them reads: 'Rule 1: We ban insider trading because Kalshi is a federally regulated U.S. exchange.' In the eyes of industry observers, the subtext of this statement is obvious: Polymarket's main platform is not under the jurisdiction of U.S. regulators.

'BETS OFF Act' signage, Representative Greg Casar and Senator Chris Murphy speak at a press conference regarding the 'Betting on Events with Security and Federal Functions Off-Limits (BETS OFF) Act'. Photographer: Stephanie Reynolds / Bloomberg

Following allegations that insider information was used to improperly bet on U.S. military actions in Iran and Venezuela, Congress has turned its focus to the issue of insider trading in prediction markets. In response, Kalshi has taken a tougher stance, imposing fines, suspending trading, and other penalties on users it deems to have violated rules; Polymarket has been relatively permissive, though with increased regulatory attention, the platform recently announced its own insider trading rules.

Kalshi spokesperson Diana said: 'We want to make these significant differences clear. Many people in the market currently conflate Kalshi and Polymarket and confuse the different paths we have taken regarding regulatory compliance.'

In addition to its overseas main platform, Polymarket also has a U.S.-regulated platform, which is still in the testing phase. The company stated in a declaration that both platforms enforce 'the same strict market integrity standards, including prohibitions on insider trading and market manipulation, active monitoring of trading, and ongoing communication and cooperation with regulators and law enforcement agencies.'

A trade on the Polymarket website regarding whether the Houthis will attack Israeli territory. Photographer: Gabby Jones / Bloomberg

Just a few months ago, Kalshi co-founder Luana Lopes Lara was still trying to ease tensions between the two rivals. In a social media post last October, she expressed hope that the industry could move beyond 'destructive infighting' and develop together.

Now, that vision seems largely shattered.

The conflict became even more difficult to reconcile after Kalshi advisor and former U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commissioner Brian Quintenz joined the fray. In response to reports that prosecutors are investigating insider trading, Brian Quintenz publicly hinted on social media this week that the investigation should focus on Polymarket. When contacted by Bloomberg News, he declined to comment further.

Domande pertinenti

QWhat is the main point of contention between Kalshi and Polymarket?

AThe core dispute revolves around their operational models and regulatory compliance. Kalshi, a US-based platform regulated by the CFTC, criticizes Polymarket for its primarily offshore, unregulated main platform and for offering controversial 'death market' contracts related to military conflicts.

QWhat specific advertising campaign did Kalshi launch against Polymarket?

AKalshi launched a targeted ad campaign in Washington, D.C., bus and metro stations. One ad stated, 'We don't do death markets,' emphasizing its federal regulation and taking a direct shot at Polymarket's offshore operations and sensitive contracts.

QHow did Polymarket respond to the allegations from Kalshi?

APolymarket responded with a statement saying, 'We welcome competition, but believe discussions should be based on facts,' and argued that misleading the public harms the entire industry and its participants. They also stated that both their offshore and US-regulated platforms maintain the same strict market integrity standards.

QWhat recent legislative focus is mentioned in the article that impacts prediction markets?

AThe article mentions that Congress has turned its focus to the issue of insider trading in prediction markets, particularly following allegations that people used inside information to bet on U.S. military actions in Iran and Venezuela. This has led to the proposed 'BETS OFF Act'.

QWhat was the reported combined recent trading volume for Kalshi and Polymarket?

AAccording to user-compiled data on Dune Analytics, the two startups recently set new weekly trading volume records, with their combined nominal trading volume approaching $6 billion.

Letture associate

The Other Side of the Stock Market Rally: Energy Restructuring, Bitcoin Squeeze, and Market Mismatch

The article examines the complex and seemingly contradictory signals in global markets, where rising equities, falling oil prices, and cooling inflation expectations coexist with unresolved structural tensions. In digital assets, a major corporate strategy added nearly $1 billion in Bitcoin, increasing its holdings significantly, while Bitcoin's price action is seen as less important than the persistent negative funding rates, indicating a crowded short position that could lead to a sharp upward repricing. The global oil trade is rapidly rewiring, with the U.S. Gulf Coast becoming a key supplier to Europe and Asia amid Middle East disruptions. However, the article warns that such supply shocks can lead to permanent demand destruction as consumers and governments adapt. U.S. equities rose on optimism over potential geopolitical de-escalation and softer PPI data, led by tech stocks like NVIDIA. Meanwhile, the U.S. Federal Reserve maintains a wait-and-see stance on rates. Geopolitically, U.S.-Iran negotiations are ongoing alongside a maritime blockade, which has disrupted energy infrastructure and supply chains. Finally, the push for supply chain reshoring, particularly in critical minerals and defense, is accelerating but faces significant execution challenges related to permitting, financing, and labor, moving the issue from cost to one of strategic necessity.

marsbit7 min fa

The Other Side of the Stock Market Rally: Energy Restructuring, Bitcoin Squeeze, and Market Mismatch

marsbit7 min fa

Pundit Says Stop Analyzing XRP On A Chart, Do This Instead

Market analyst Luke Suther argues that traditional chart-based analysis fails to capture XRP's true long-term value. Instead, he emphasizes evaluating XRP's underlying utility as a settlement layer within the global financial infrastructure, estimated at $5.53 quadrillion. This includes systems like SWIFT, DTCC, major banks, and payment processors. Suther contends that XRP's price should be assessed based on its capacity to facilitate fast, low-cost, large-scale value transfers. He explains that a higher XRP price is functionally necessary to support efficient institutional liquidity and minimize slippage, rather than being measured by market cap alone.

bitcoinist36 min fa

Pundit Says Stop Analyzing XRP On A Chart, Do This Instead

bitcoinist36 min fa

Interpreting the FBI's '2025 Internet Crime Report': AI Fraud Becomes the Biggest Variable, Individuals Aged 60+ Emerge as Primary Targets for Crypto Scams

FBI's 2025 Internet Crime Report, based on over 1 million complaints, reveals record losses of $20.877 billion, a 26% increase from 2024. Cryptocurrency-related crimes surged to $11.366 billion, with victims over 60 years old being the primary target, suffering $2.76 billion in crypto investment scams alone. This age group was also most affected by recovery scams. Investment fraud was the costliest crime at $8.649 billion, followed by BEC scams ($3.047B) and tech support fraud ($2.135B). Phishing was the most common complaint. Ransomware attacks caused over $32 million in losses, with Akira and Qilin among the top variants. A significant emerging threat is AI-driven fraud, involved in over 22,000 complaints causing $893 million in losses. AI was used to create deepfakes for investment scams ($632M), BEC, and impersonation schemes. The report highlights the industrialization of scams through automation. Despite law enforcement successes, like freezing $679 million, the escalating losses and sophistication of attacks underscore the critical importance of public awareness and enhanced cybersecurity measures.

marsbit42 min fa

Interpreting the FBI's '2025 Internet Crime Report': AI Fraud Becomes the Biggest Variable, Individuals Aged 60+ Emerge as Primary Targets for Crypto Scams

marsbit42 min fa

US Stocks Hit Record Highs: Why Isn't the Market Afraid of the Flames of War?

U.S. stocks hit a record high on April 15, with the S&P 500 closing at 7,022.95, just 77 days after its previous peak. This rebound occurred in only 11 trading days—far faster than recoveries following past crises like the COVID-19 pandemic (103 days) or the 2011 debt crisis (106 days). The market's rapid recovery is attributed to "ceasefire expectations" rather than deteriorating economic fundamentals. During the sell-off triggered by the U.S.-Israel military action against Iran in late February, the S&P 500 fell nearly 10%. However, the market rallied twice on ceasefire rumors—first on March 24 and again on April 8—even before any permanent peace deal was signed. Notably, the VIX fear index fell below pre-war levels, indicating that the market had repriced the conflict from an uncertainty to a calculable risk. Major financial institutions like JPMorgan reported record trading revenues of $11.6 billion in Q1 2026, largely driven by volatility in commodities and emerging markets. Hedge funds turned net long for the first time since late 2025, while margin debt hit a record $1.28 trillion. This reflects a financial system that commercializes volatility, treating geopolitical shocks as tradable opportunities rather than systemic threats. However, the current optimism relies on assumptions of a sustained ceasefire and stable oil prices, leaving the market vulnerable if these conditions change.

marsbit47 min fa

US Stocks Hit Record Highs: Why Isn't the Market Afraid of the Flames of War?

marsbit47 min fa

Is the Rebound an Illusion? The Bond Market Has Already Given the Answer

Is the stock market's rapid rebound to pre-war levels a sign of recovery or a misleading rally driven by momentum rather than fundamentals? While the S&P 500 has fully recovered its losses from the U.S.-Iran conflict and nears all-time highs, bond and oil markets tell a different story. Key data reveals contradictions: 10-year Treasury yields have risen 30 basis points, signaling persistent inflation concerns and constrained Fed policy space. WTI crude is up 37%, indicating that geopolitical risks are not priced to resolve soon. The 2-year Treasury yield, a sensitive gauge of rate expectations, has increased nearly 40 bps, challenging the narrative of imminent Fed rate cuts. The equity market appears to be pricing in a "perfect scenario": subdued oil impact on consumption, Fed rate cuts despite hot inflation, stable corporate margins, and near-term conflict resolution. However, bonds and oil reflect a reality of sticky inflation, limited Fed flexibility, and ongoing geopolitical tension. This divergence suggests the rally may be momentum-driven rather than fundamentally justified. If upcoming CPI data exceeds expectations (e.g., above 3.5%), the 2026 rate-cut narrative could collapse. Investors chasing the rally are betting on an ideal outcome—swift conflict resolution, controlled inflation, Fed easing, and resilient earnings—while ignoring signals from more cautious asset classes. The gap will likely close either through a fundamental improvement validating stocks or a market correction aligning with bond and oil realities.

marsbit55 min fa

Is the Rebound an Illusion? The Bond Market Has Already Given the Answer

marsbit55 min fa

Trading

Spot

Futures