Prediction markets are gaining more global acceptance, but not in Australia, where the country\u2019s securities regulator has drawn explicit parallels between the products and betting.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In a blog post last Friday, Sarah Court,<\/strong> Chair of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC),<\/strong> made it clear that the regulator \u201cis not currently convinced that prediction markets for retail clients are in the public interest\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cPrediction market contracts have all the features of a bet,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Court added that the event contracts offered by prediction market operators often \u201chave nothing to do with investment\u201d, citing sporting results as the prime example.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThese features raise questions about whether prediction market contracts are appropriately described as investment products,\u201d she continued.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Australia a no-go zone for prediction markets<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The ASIC Chair\u2019s comments get to the heart of the defining regulatory dilemma around prediction markets \u2013 are they a form of gambling or not? Divides between different corporations and regulators are sharply drawn on this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the US, the biggest jurisdiction for prediction markets, the federal Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) <\/strong>has firmly put itself behind prediction markets operators like Kalshi, Polymarket, Crypto.com and Robinhood.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Regulators and governments in different states, however, oppose them, with Arizona and Utah having filed criminal charges against Kalshi, the world\u2019s biggest prediction markets platform with a valuation of over $40bn.<\/p>\n\n\n\n