June 2026 | Chicago, IL

Hosted by Trillium Surveyor, KPMG, and Wedbush, the Prediction Markets Roundtable brought together senior leaders from across the financial services ecosystem to discuss the operational, regulatory, and market structure considerations emerging as prediction markets continue to evolve.

The discussion included participants from firms such as Robinhood, Webull, Crypto.com, Katten, Charles Schwab, CME Group, DriveWealth, Jump Trading, Morgan Stanley, CIBC, Tradier, Mesirow and other firms spanning brokerage, trading, market infrastructure, compliance, and wealth management.

The following observations are shared under Chatham House Rules and reflect themes that emerged throughout the discussion. Comments are not attributed to any individual or organization.

Existing Market Infrastructure Provides a Starting Point

While prediction markets are often discussed as a new asset class, participants noted that many of the underlying operational, compliance, and oversight challenges already exist in futures, options, and other derivatives markets. Rather than building entirely new frameworks, firms are evaluating how existing clearing, surveillance, supervision, and compliance infrastructure can be adapted and expanded to support event contracts.

Information Asymmetry Remains a Central Challenge, Especially with Employees.

One of the most active areas of discussion centered on information asymmetry, influence over outcomes, and access to non-public information. Participants explored how firms can establish appropriate controls around employees, participants, and those with potential access to prior knowledge while balancing market integrity with legitimate participation. Employee trading programs emerged as a particular area of focus, with several participants noting the challenge of creating safeguards that are effective without becoming unnecessarily restrictive. Concerns often extended beyond actual misconduct to the potential for employee activity to undermine confidence in the market or reflect negatively on the reputation of their firm.

Not All Event Contracts Present the Same Risks

A recurring theme was that prediction markets should not be viewed as a single category. Political events, economic indicators, weather events, sports outcomes, and other event contracts can introduce very different participant behaviors, information sources, manipulation risks, and oversight considerations. Participants discussed the importance of evaluating risk within the context of the specific market being traded rather than applying a uniform approach across all event contracts.

Market Integrity Is an Ecosystem Responsibility

Participants acknowledged that bad actors will inevitably look for ways to circumvent rules and controls, making market integrity a shared responsibility across the ecosystem rather than the responsibility of any single organization. Discussion focused on the need for oversight across the full participant lifecycle, including customer onboarding, KYC and AML controls, employee trading programs, participant monitoring, trade surveillance, investigations, and post-trade review. Participants emphasized that maintaining market integrity will require coordination across exchanges, FCMs, brokers, technology providers, and market participants rather than reliance on any single process, function, or control.

Data Requires Context, Not Just Consolidation

While access to market data remains important, participants emphasized that oversight often requires additional context beyond order and trade activity. Event-specific information, participant relationships, historical behavior, and outcome data may all be necessary to understand whether activity is legitimate, suspicious, or potentially manipulative. Several participants noted that effective oversight ultimately depends on data traceability and the ability to reconstruct the full lifecycle of an order from onboarding through execution and review.

Regulatory and Legal Developments Continue to Shape the Path Forward

Participants discussed ongoing questions around federal versus state oversight, the role of the CFTC, and the emerging circuit split surrounding prediction market jurisdiction. Several noted that the conversation has evolved beyond whether prediction markets should exist, pointing to recent actions where the CFTC has not only asserted regulatory authority but actively defended the development of regulated prediction markets. Participants also discussed multiple potential paths toward greater regulatory clarity, including judicial outcomes, legislative action, and future regulatory priorities shaped by changes in administration and agency leadership. While legal and jurisdictional questions remain, many firms are preparing for multiple potential outcomes rather than waiting for a single definitive framework to emerge.

International Adoption May Follow Familiar Market Access Trends

Participants discussed how international interest in prediction markets may follow patterns already seen in equities and 24/5 trading, where investors outside the United States seek access to U.S. markets because of established regulatory frameworks, investor protections, liquidity, and market integrity standards. Confidence in the underlying market structure was viewed as an important driver of long-term adoption.

Adaptability May Be the Most Important Capability

Across technology, compliance, and operational discussions, participants repeatedly emphasized adaptability. With market structures, regulations, participant behavior, and product offerings continuing to evolve, firms are increasingly focused on building flexible frameworks that can adjust alongside the market rather than optimizing for a single future state.

Several participants noted that investment decisions are increasingly centered on technology stacks that can support multiple market and regulatory outcomes. The ability to evolve alongside the market was viewed as a key advantage in an environment where many questions remain unanswered.