Prediction markets hit $2.9B World Cup volume in 11 days, beating March Madness

Just 11 days into the World Cup, prediction markets are already posting eye-popping numbers: Kalshi reports World Cup trading volume of $2.9 billion, including combination bets, and it is still rising. Fortune notes that this figure has already surpassed other major sports benchmarks, including March Madness at $2.51 billion and this season’s Champions League at $685 million.

The speed matters as much as the total. Fortune frames this as more than a novelty. These platforms let fans place and trade small-dollar positions on real-world outcomes straight from their phones, and the World Cup has become a proving ground for how quickly this “quirky finance corner” can turn into a mainstream behavior.

Kalshi is not alone. Fortune says Polymarket, a major rival, has reported similarly strong activity, including $2.5 billion in cumulative trading volume for World Cup wagers since launching last July, and that soccer-related trading on its global decentralized finance platform has exceeded $5 billion over the same period. In other words, the World Cup is not just driving attention. It is generating liquidity across multiple product surfaces, which is usually what causes markets to grow, keep users engaged, and then attract more issuers, integrators, and (eventually) scrutiny.

Another data point comes from Robinhood. The outlet reports that Robinhood shared World Cup prediction market activity by citing contract volume through Rothera, a CFTC-licensed exchange and clearinghouse operated through its joint venture with Susquehanna International Group. A Robinhood spokesperson told Fortune that Rothera has executed more than 500 million contracts since the start of the month, including 400 million since June 11, which was the tournament’s opening day. That is a reminder that prediction markets are not operating in a vacuum. They connect to established distribution channels and clearing infrastructure, which makes the “financial-market-like” comparison harder to ignore.

Why would this happen during the World Cup specifically? Fortune points to the sport’s constant randomness. Spain, one of the tournament favorites, drew 0-0 with Cabo Verde in its initial match last Monday. Cristiano Ronaldo’s Portugal recorded a surprising draw against Congo, a result that was widely viewed as a straightforward win on paper. In this kind of environment, bettors face both windfalls and wipeouts fast, and the market absorbs that volatility in public.

Fortune gives two concrete examples. In the Portugal-Congo match, a Polymarket user with the handle “BreakTheBank” wagered just under $300,000 that Portugal would not win, then booked a profit of nearly $1 million when the match ended. Separately, Fortune reports that a newly created wallet placed a $4 million bet on the same platform that Spain would not beat Cabo Verde and walked away with roughly $9 million. Those outcomes may sound like entertainment to some readers, but they also fuel concerns about whether trades reflect luck, skill, or unfair access. And for companies building these platforms, that reputational and regulatory risk becomes part of the product.

Those risks are already spilling into policy. Fortune notes that some countries have moved to ban or block certain markets entirely. In the United States, it describes an ongoing fight between federal regulators and state authorities over whether event contracts in prediction markets are closer to financial instruments or unlicensed gambling. That regulatory uncertainty is not academic. If regulators treat these products as financial instruments, companies may need to adjust compliance, reporting, and market structure. If regulators treat them as unlicensed gambling, companies may face enforcement actions or constraints on where and how they operate. Either way, the growth in trading volume raises the stakes.

This is also why World Cup numbers matter beyond sports. Fortune’s framing is that this tournament has helped confirm the rise of prediction markets in the US, where they are increasingly used as an accessible way to bet on just about everything. Once users get used to trading outcomes with small-dollar positions, the same interface pattern can migrate to other categories: politics-adjacent questions, entertainment results, and real-world events beyond athletics. For executives and boards, the second-order implication is straightforward. Higher volume brings more users, more incentives to innovate, and more regulatory pressure, all at the same time.

If you’re an operator, investor, or compliance leader watching this space, the World Cup provides a stress test. The platforms that win will be the ones that can scale liquidity without breaking trust, and scale distribution without triggering a regulatory backflash severe enough to freeze growth. The question is no longer whether prediction markets have a moment. It’s whether they can prove, quickly and repeatedly, that the system works under real-world pressure.