How Many Prediction Markets is Too Many?

Geoff Zochodne - Sports Betting Journalist at Covers.com
Geoff Zochodne • Senior News Analyst 15+ years betting experience
Updated: Jun 5, 2026 , 05:06 PM ET • 4 min read

With BetRivers owner Rush Street Interactive dipping a toe into prediction markets, questions about future consolidation seem reasonable given the online sports betting land rush.

Photo By - Covers.

It’s looking pretty crowded right now in the prediction market business.

Covers Icon
Key Takeaways
  • The growing prediction market sector includes established exchanges, sportsbook brands, and numerous other applicants, raising questions about how many operators the market can support.
  • Unlike state-regulated sportsbooks, prediction markets currently avoid state gambling taxes, can access certain state markets, and may attract a larger customer base, which may give operators a better chance of surviving without major consolidation.
  • Rush Street Interactive’s move into prediction markets also suggests smaller operators may not need to dominate the industry to succeed, much like the company has done in online casino gaming.

You’ve got pure-play prediction market operators like Crypto.com, Kalshi, Polymarket, and the Robinhood/Susquehanna-based “Rothera” exchanges. Then you’ve also got the sports betting brands: DraftKings, FanDuel, Fanatics, as well as DFS names like PrizePicks and Underdog. 

Furthermore, there is a small army of operators with their license applications still “pending” with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).

You've got names like Smarkets, Sporttrade, ProphetX, and Novig lining up. Most recently, BetRivers owner Rush Street Interactive Inc. applied for a designated contract market (DCM) license of its own.

That’s a lot of potential prediction market operators, and a lot of them aren’t facilitating betting trading at all yet. So, the question is: Can all of these companies actually win in the prediction market game? There has to be both winners and losers, right? 

We saw a similar phenomenon play out when legal U.S. sports betting began expanding at the state level in 2018.

Dozens of brands piled into the space, and then consolidation ensued after it turned out the gold rush didn’t have enough nuggets for everybody. 

When the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2018, "many expected sports betting to resemble the fragmented European model, with multiple operators competing for balanced market share," NEXT.io explained in March.

"Instead, the market consolidated rapidly around two dominant players (DraftKings and FanDuel), reshaping competitive dynamics in ways few anticipated," NEXT.io added.

The Big 2

Data published Friday from research firm Blask noted there were 22 brands "actively operating" in the event contract business in the U.S., but that the market "is effectively a duopoly" of Kalshi and Polymarket. The two operators have more than 97% of "branded demand" sewn up between them, Blask found.

It may stand to reason, then, that we’ll see some prediction market consolidation at some point. After all, offering de facto sports betting is really doing a lot of heavy lifting for prediction markets at the moment.

However, there may also be reasons why the land rush for prediction markets has a lot more room in which exchanges can run. 

The biggest reason may be that operating costs for prediction markets aren’t as crippling as they can be for state-regulated online sports betting operators. DraftKings illustrated this in March, as its investor day presentation indicated the company expects its prediction market platform to have a 10%-to-30% higher adjusted gross margin than its online sportsbook.

“This is because this industry does not have state gaming taxes, and we expect long-term promotions to be more limited,” DraftKings general manager of predictions Jeanine Hightower-Sellitto told analysts and investors. 

No state tax is a huge expense removed from the cost equation for prediction markets, which are trying to beat back attempts by states to regulate and tax them. The number of court challenges involving prediction markets, the CFTC, and state authorities continues to grow and could prove devastating to the exchanges someday, particularly if the legality of sports-event contracts is undermined permanently.

But today just isn’t that day. 

So, with no state gambling taxes to contend with right now, there’s a lot less of a financial burden on prediction markets. And that may keep companies alive and humming in a way that just wasn’t doable under the state-regulated model for online sports betting. 

Another thing going for prediction markets is that the player pool may be deeper than state-regulated online sports betting. That is due in part to prediction markets being accessible for people as young as 18, rather than 21 for state-regulated sports betting, which is a significant concern for some folks watching the space.

There’s also the possibility of prediction markets pulling in business from consumers who weren’t state-regulated sports bettors, but crypto or stock market speculators. That raises its own concerns, such as people depleting retirement savings to gamble on sporting events, but it also hypothetically means a larger pool of potential customers for exchanges to acquire.

So, fewer taxes and more players could perhaps keep a prediction market viable for an operator in a way it couldn’t as a state-regulated online sportsbook operator. There is also the not-insignificant fact that prediction market operators can (currently) access hugely significant states like California, Florida, and Texas, whereas state-regulated online sportsbooks are mostly left on the sidelines there.

And if a company is OK without being the biggest of prediction market operators (or even with being a broker or futures commission merchant, not an actual runner of exchanges), their lifespan could lengthen as well. The fact that RSI wants in could be suggestive of this because it’s not the largest online gambling operator in the U.S., but it’s having a very good run these days. 

Granted, at this point, it looks like RSI’s interest in prediction markets may be more CYA than DIY, especially if some prediction market operator gets bold enough to launch something resembling an online casino.

“We certainly are never going to be caught flat-footed,” CEO Richard Schwartz said during a fireside chat in May, adding that the company has “strategies in place.”

But if the RSI experience in prediction markets plays out as it did in online sports betting and iGaming, there may be an opportunity for operators to survive and thrive even off the podium.

Enjoying Covers content? Add us as a preferred source on your Google account Add as a preferred source on Google

Good enough could be good enough

In April, for example, investment bank Citizens reported that Rush Street had a 1.8% share of gross online sports betting revenue in the U.S.

But it’s not in online sports betting where Rush Street is really shining. It's in online casino gambling, as Citizens reported that RSI's iGaming market share was 7% in April, ahead of operators like Caesars and Fanatics. RSI’s first-quarter earnings were sparkling in the eyes of analysts as well, beating estimates for revenue and adjusted earnings.

“We believe this will be the strongest quarter reported by any gaming company during (the first quarter of 2026),” the Citizens analysts wrote.

So, there you have it: an online gambling company that’s doing just fine without being the biggest. And investors have noticed, with RSI shares bucking a trend in the industry by posting huge gains, up more than 100% from a year ago.

If Rush Street believes there may come a day when it wants to be a fixture in prediction market news, it will be well after the big boys have grabbed up a lot of land. But it's possible there still may be more than enough land to go around.

Pages related to this topic

Geoff Zochodne, Covers Sports Betting Journalist
Senior News Analyst

Geoff has been writing about the legalization and regulation of sports betting in Canada and the United States for more than four years. His work has included coverage of launches in New York, Ohio, and Ontario, numerous court proceedings, and the decriminalization of single-game wagering by Canadian lawmakers. As an expert on the growing online gambling industry in North America, Geoff has appeared on and been cited by publications and networks such as Axios, TSN Radio, and VSiN. Prior to joining Covers, he spent 10 years as a journalist reporting on business and politics, including a stint at the Ontario legislature. More recently, Geoff’s work has focused on the pending launch of a competitive iGaming market in Alberta, the evolution of major companies within the gambling industry, and efforts by U.S. state regulators to rein in offshore activity and college player prop betting.

Popular Content

Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo GPWA Logo GDPR Logo GeoTrust Logo Evalon Logo