Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Fortune Hunt, and I'm a trader and investor based in New York. I've been actively trading on prediction markets like Kalshi for a while now, and I'm writing to express my strong support for proportionate regulation of these markets as outlined in the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets (91 FR 12516). I believe prediction markets provide unique value to society and to people like me who rely on accurate information to make decisions.
As someone who spends a lot of time analyzing markets, I can tell you that prediction markets consistently produce forecasts that are more accurate than polls or pundits. I've seen this firsthand. For example, during the last election cycle, I was tracking odds on Kalshi for certain key states, and the market prices were closer to the final results than any poll I read. This isn't just useful for traders like me; it helps everyone, from journalists to policymakers, get a clearer picture of what's likely to happen. That kind of information isn't available anywhere else, and it's a public good we shouldn't stifle with overly restrictive rules.
I also want to push back on the idea that event contracts are gambling. They're not. Trading on these markets requires research, analysis, and judgment about real-world events, just like trading stocks or commodities. I put in hours reading news, studying data, and weighing probabilities before making a trade. That's not a game of chance; it's a skill. These markets serve real economic purposes, like price discovery and even hedging against uncertainties that affect my investments. Calling this "gaming" would be like calling all investing gaming, and I don't think that's a fair comparison.
I'm particularly drawn to some of the questions in your ANPR, like Question 7 on balancing innovation with consumer protection and Question 15 on defining gaming versus legitimate markets. My view is that innovation should be encouraged, not shut down, as long as there are safeguards against manipulation or fraud. The CFTC already has tools to address bad actors, and those should be used instead of broad bans. Punishing everyone for the actions of a few doesn't make sense to me.
I understand there are concerns about insider trading or market manipulation, but those are already illegal. The answer isn't to ban prediction markets; it's to enforce the laws we have. Shutting down these platforms would just push activity to unregulated offshore sites, which is worse for everyone.
In closing, I urge the CFTC to support well-regulated prediction markets with rules that address specific risks without over-restricting access. These markets are too valuable to lose, both for traders like me and for the broader public who benefit from better information. Thank you for considering my input.
Sincerely,
Fortune Hunt
