Polymarket is in talks to raise $400m at a valuation of up to $15bn, a roughly two-thirds increase on the $9bn price tag set only months earlier by existing investors.
The fundraising round, first reported by The Information, follows a sustained surge in trading activity on the platform. More than $1bn a week now moves through Polymarket, with much of that volume tied to bets on the Iran conflict and related geopolitical events.
Valuation up two-thirds in under a year
The trajectory of Polymarket’s valuation has accelerated quickly for a business operating in a contested regulatory category. In June 2025, Peter Thiel’s Founders Fund led a $200m round at a $1bn valuation. Months later, Intercontinental Exchange, the owner of the New York Stock Exchange, pledged $1bn at a $9bn valuation. ICE has since added a further $600m to that position.
If the new round closes at the reported top end, Polymarket will have moved from unicorn status to a $15bn valuation in under a year.
ICE has said it intends to act as a “global distributor” of Polymarket’s data, packaging the platform’s order flow into sentiment analysis products for institutional investors. Datafeeds from Polymarket and similar venues have already begun shaping trades in adjacent markets, with oil traders cited as early users of prediction market signals.
Middle East volume raises insider trading concerns
Much of the recent volume increase traces to the Iran conflict. Bets on the timing of US-Israel strikes against Iran, and on ceasefire conditions, have drawn scrutiny after several wagers showed patterns consistent with trading on non-public information.
Israeli authorities arrested several individuals earlier this year and charged two on suspicion of using classified information to place bets on the platform. A separate Guardian investigation identified coordinated activity in online communities, including Discord groups, where users discuss arbitrage strategies on frontline movements in Ukraine and attempt to copy wallets suspected of holding insider information.
The same investigation documented cases where Polymarket users pressured independent institutions, including media outlets and think tanks, to alter public reporting in ways that would settle specific bets in their favour. One incident involved threats directed at an Israeli journalist over coverage of an Iranian strike on Israel on a specific date.
Fee structure and market scope
Polymarket takes a commission on some trades, with fees varying by category. The company states that geopolitical and world events markets are “fee-free.” Users bet by buying and selling shares in the outcome of future events, from election results to the potential departure date of UK prime minister Keir Starmer, and from the second coming of Jesus Christ to a US ban on TikTok.
The investor base reflects the platform’s political proximity to the current US administration. Alongside Founders Fund and ICE, backers include a venture capital firm owned by Donald Trump Jr. The pace of capital flowing into prediction markets is not limited to Polymarket: rival Kalshi raised $300m in a round that expanded its operations to more than 140 countries last October.
Market distortion risk
Polymarket rose to prominence during the 2024 US presidential election cycle, after which the pollster Nate Silver joined the company’s advisory board. Silver argued at the time that prediction markets can produce better forecasts than polling because participants face monetary incentives to be correct.
Market structure experts have pushed back on the “truth signal” framing. Concentrated positions held by a relatively small number of users can move the reported odds on major events, with those odds now feeding into trading decisions in oil, equity and sentiment data products. That creates a mechanism through which a thin slice of participants on an unregulated betting venue can influence outcomes in regulated financial markets.
The Polymarket round is proceeding against a shifting regulatory backdrop for prediction markets across the US and Europe, with jurisdictions including Massachusetts, Nevada and Denmark having challenged the sector’s classification as something distinct from gambling. The Danish Gambling Authority has described itself as unable to block prediction market platforms that do not specifically target Danish users. No US federal framework has yet settled the question of whether prediction markets operate as commodities trading venues, sportsbooks, or a category of their own.
Polymarket has been approached for comment.
Source: The Guardian
