Kalshi could soon reach a new milestone. According to Bloomberg, the American predictive markets platform is discussing a new funding round that would raise its valuation to 65 billion dollar
Kalshi could soon reach a new milestone. According to Bloomberg, the American predictive markets platform is discussing a new funding round that would raise its valuation to 65 billion dollars. Yet, just one month after raising 1 billion at a 40 billion valuation, the company still has to resolve several regulatory battles. Its IPO is not expected before 2027.
The progression is dizzying. In October, Kalshi closed a series G of one billion dollars, which valued the company at 40 billion. Sequoia Capital and Wellington Management led this operation, with the participation of Baillie Gifford, Morgan Stanley, Coatue and Andreessen Horowitz.
One month later, Bloomberg reports that the platform is discussing a new round based on 65 billion dollars. This represents an increase of 62.5% in a few weeks. At this pace, you would almost need a schedule to keep track of Kalshi’s valuations.
Be careful though: this amount remains an estimate reported by anonymous sources. The company has not published any official announcement on this subject.
On his side, Tarek Mansour, co-founder and CEO of Kalshi, mentioned the possibility of an IPO. However, he ruled out such an operation in 2026, without specifying a timeline for afterwards.
This perspective comes in a turbulent financial context, especially since the departure of the Nvidia founder. Despite the uncertainties surrounding the markets, some investors therefore seem ready to bet even more on predictive platforms.
But behind this financial enthusiasm hides a much more serious problem: American regulation.
To defend its model, Kalshi treats its event markets as swaps, in other words derivatives products that fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).
Authorities in several states do not share this interpretation. Twenty-two states challenge this classification and consider that some markets, particularly those related to sports events, fall under local gambling laws. Thirty-eight attorneys general support this opposition.
The CFTC itself defends Kalshi’s position. In a public statement, its chairman recalled that these products constitute commodity derivatives and therefore fall under the agency’s jurisdiction. He also assured that the agency would protect its exclusive authority in this field.
However, this stance does not end the standoff. Arkansas in particular has filed lawsuits against Kalshi for deceptive business practices.
The CFTC’s position on these markets shows that the federal regulator intends to defend its prerogatives. It remains to be seen whether the courts will follow this reading.
The stake goes far beyond Kalshi’s case. If the states win this battle, the platform might have to obtain separate authorizations in each jurisdiction. Its national model would then risk turning into an administrative maze of 50 steps.
Conversely, a victory for Kalshi and the CFTC would open the way to a more uniform federal framework. This is precisely the outlook that might attract investors.
The crypto sector knows this kind of blockage well: between political promises and their translation into law, the path is sometimes long. Moreover, the crypto industry still struggles to have the laws it hopes for adopted in Congress.
On the commercial side, Kalshi nevertheless has a strong argument. The platform approached 100 billion dollars in transaction volumes in October. Its competitor Polymarket also shows significant activity, with nearly 15 billion dollars in monthly volumes on its American branch. However, the two figures do not cover exactly the same scope and thus do not allow for a direct comparison.
These volumes testify to the growing interest in predictive markets. However, they do not represent the company’s revenues. Kalshi charges commissions on transactions, and its income depends notably on the fees applied, the frequency of trades, and the markets that attract the most activity.
Yet, the company does not publicly disclose all these parameters. Under these conditions, it is impossible to verify precisely whether a valuation of 65 billion dollars corresponds to its financial performance.
Two elements can nonetheless explain investors’ appetite. First, the rapid growth of activity. Second, the hope for clearer regulation that would allow Kalshi to continue its expansion without multiplying conflicts with local authorities.
There remains one major unknown: the judicial timeline. An IPO after 2026 will require solid accounts, but also a regulatory environment stable enough to reassure future shareholders.
For now, Kalshi has the volumes, attracts investors, and nurtures great ambitions. But between a valuation of 65 billion dollars and a successful Wall Street debut, there remain some obstacles. And unlike the results of a sports match, those of its legal battles are not yet easy to predict.
