Sportsbook giants seek aligned prediction rules

• Executives from DraftKings, Fanatics, and FanDuel addressed the CFTC’s Innovation Advisory Committee, calling for consistent consumer protections as prediction markets expand.
• DraftKings CEO Jason Robins said rules should be identical whether customers trade directly through exchanges or via intermediaries.
• CFTC chairman Michael Selig closed the meeting by reaffirming the commission’s determination to preserve federal oversight of prediction markets.

Executives from DraftKings, Fanatics, and FanDuel urged the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to establish consistent consumer protections and clearer industry standards as prediction markets expand, addressing the CFTC’s Innovation Advisory Committee inaugural meeting on August 20.

The appeal came as the three sportsbook operators build out prediction platforms alongside newer entrants such as Kalshi and Polymarket, and followed sharp disagreements between established derivatives exchanges and prediction market executives over market integrity.

It also lands as adoption climbs: a recent survey found 15% of Americans have already traded an event-contract product. Another survey found that 1 in 4 Morgan Stanley summer interns have used betting or prediction market apps in the past year.

One rulebook, no exceptions

DraftKings CEO Jason Robins called for identical consumer protections regardless of how customers access prediction markets. He said customers trading directly through designated contract markets, or DCMs, should face the same rules as those using futures commission merchants, or FCMs, the intermediaries that facilitate transactions.

Jason Robins, CEO of DraftKings, said:

“The rules for customers going directly to DCM versus those going through an FCM should be identical. There really is no distinction from the consumer protection perspective.”

For an operator running both a DCM-style exchange and an FCM-style brokerage arm, as DraftKings does through its DKeX exchange, that distinction matters commercially. Some rivals have sidestepped the split altogether: Underdog acquired its own federally registered exchange rather than operate across two regulatory tracks.

DraftKings reported more than 600,000 prediction customers through the first half of 2026 via its DKeX exchange, with uptake exceeding its own expectations.

The DCM-FCM question sat alongside a sharper fight over self-certification, the process that lets exchanges list new event contracts without prior CFTC sign-off. CME Group CEO Terry Duffy told the committee that roughly 2,500 self-certifications have been filed since January 2025, with none formally opposed by the agency.

Kalshi cofounder Luana Lopes Lara pushed back on Duffy, arguing fast-moving event contracts need a listing process that can keep pace with the underlying events. Robins used his remarks to steer the room away from that fight rather than take a side.

Robins said:

“Try to refrain from taking shots at each other’s business models or decisions you may not 100% agree with. That doesn’t advance the discussion. All it does is sow divisions and distract the discussion towards debates that really aren’t productive.”

Small chunk, big risk

Fanatics Betting and Gaming CEO Matt King focused on the financial risks facing retail customers on prediction platforms, including Fanatics Markets, and the consequences operators could face without clear responsible-trading standards.

Matt King, CEO of Fanatics Betting and Gaming, said:

“While a vast majority of customers will use these products for profit or for fun, there is a small chunk of them that will have a problem using them.”

King, a relative newcomer to prediction markets, said his background serving retail sportsbook customers shaped his approach to the space. He said:

“I think we have an amazing opportunity because of the leadership in this room to take a leadership position around the issue and set super clear standards from Day 1.”

FanDuel president Christian Genetski echoed that focus on trust, pointing to consumer protection, market integrity, and advertising as areas where added regulatory clarity could help. Genetski said:

“The most critical thing we can do for prediction markets right now is to build consumer trust. The way to do that is to have clear rules of the road and a level playing field for all the participants.”

Selig holds the line

CFTC chairman Michael Selig closed the advisory session by stressing the commission’s determination to preserve federal oversight of prediction markets, as it continues litigation against nine states over jurisdiction.

Selig has repeatedly argued the products are structurally distinct from sports betting, previously noting that regulated exchanges cannot limit winners the way sportsbooks routinely do.

He said the CFTC would soon propose amendments to Parts 38 and 40 of its rules governing DCMs that list event contracts. The changes are aimed at consumer protection, product governance, and incentive-program design, and follow the agency’s recent scrutiny of sportsbook-style odds on regulated platforms.

Minnesota law in limbo

The state-court record so far has been mixed for both sides. Washington has ordered Kalshi to geofence sports, election, and mentions markets by early September.

Minnesota passed the first US law making it a crime to operate a prediction market, but a federal judge blocked the statute on July 27, days before its August 1 effective date, after the Minnesota criminalization push drew suits from the CFTC, the Department of Justice, Kalshi, and Polymarket. The law remains unenforced while that litigation continues.

For DraftKings, Fanatics, and FanDuel, the state-by-state patchwork is the operational headache the CFTC’s rulemaking and litigation strategy is meant to resolve. Each company runs its prediction business through a federally regulated wrapper specifically to sidestep the licensing regime that governs its sportsbook.

Any court ruling that narrows that federal shield would force a rebuild of distribution, marketing, and geofencing logic across every state where a challenge lands. Compliance teams at all three operators are effectively underwriting the outcome of that jurisdictional fight in real time, adjusting product availability by state as new suits and injunctions arrive.