How we test & rank prediction market apps
The full editorial standard behind every Top-Apps list, app review, and California legality page on this site. Written so you can hold us to it.
How we test
No platform is added to our Top Apps list until our editor has tested it with her own money, on real markets, from sign-up to withdrawal. We do not rely on press releases, demo accounts or other sites' reviews.
Every platform we rank has been opened, funded (about $200 each), traded on and withdrawn from by our editor. Trade counts run from about 10 to 50 per platform. We re-check fees, payment methods and availability against each platform's own pages and date every check.
- Sign up and verify. Catie opens a real account on the platform with her own details and goes through identity checks like any new user.
- Deposit. She funds the account with her own money, about $200 per platform, using a normal payment method.
- Trade. She places real trades, roughly 10 to 50 per platform depending on what it offers, across the kinds of markets the platform lists.
- Withdraw. She takes money out and notes how the process works.
- Read the rules. Fees, payment methods, age limits and state availability are taken from each platform's own help pages and terms, with the date we checked them. Legal status comes from court rulings and regulator sources.
We re-check the published facts when a platform changes its fees, offers or availability. The current order is on our Top Apps page.
Regulatory tracking
Prediction-market law moves fast, sometimes weekly. We treat regulator action the same way a financial newsroom treats an SEC filing: as a primary source that overrides anything an operator's PR team says.
Sources we monitor
- CFTC press releases, no-action letters, enforcement actions, and DCM order books.
- PACER court filings for any active Kalshi / Polymarket / ProphetX / KalshiEX litigation, including state AG suits.
- State gambling regulators and attorneys general, for cease-and-desist letters and lawsuits.
- California-specific channels: the California Bureau of Gambling Control, the California Gambling Control Commission, and the state Attorney General's gaming filings.
Editorial independence
Journalists covering this beat can find pre-cleared quotes, brand assets, and contact details in our press kit.
No paid placement
Operators cannot pay for inclusion, premium positioning, sponsored sections, or favourable language.
FTC-compliant disclosure
We follow the FTC's Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising (16 CFR Part 255). In practice that means:
- Affiliate relationships are disclosed above the fold on every page that contains commercial links, not buried in a footer.
- Bonus claims are quoted from the operator's own published terms. We do not invent dollar figures or rollover requirements to make an offer sound better.
- Language like "guaranteed," "risk-free," or "easy money" is never used. Trading involves real loss risk and we say so on every page that promotes a platform.
- We do not market to anyone under 18. Every sign-up CTA carries the 21+ trade-responsibly badge with a link to Responsible Trading.
Sourcing standards
Every factual claim on this site falls into one of three tiers. We tag each source by tier internally and surface citations in the Sources block at the bottom of every guide.
Tier 1: Primary
Regulators, courts, operators
CFTC press releases and rulemaking, court dockets (PACER), state AG opinions, the operator's own published terms and SEC/CFTC filings. Used for any legal claim, fee schedule, or regulatory status statement. Always linked.
Tier 2: Major newsrooms
Reuters, Bloomberg, WSJ, NYT, AP
Used for context, valuations, and reporting on private operator behaviour we cannot verify directly. We prefer outlets that publish staff bylines and corrections policies.
Tier 3: Specialist trades
Industry publications, academic research
Used sparingly, for technical detail and historical context. Affiliate-funded competitor sites are never cited as sources.
Numbers we do not invent
User counts, trading volumes, valuations, and bonus values are quoted from the operator's own materials or a Tier-1/2 source, never estimated. If a number cannot be verified, we either omit it or describe it qualitatively ("deepest US liquidity in 2025") instead of inventing a figure.
The Venice Score
Our rubric is the Venice Score: a 0 to 100 rating built from six weighted checks, judged by our editor from her own funded account and each platform's published terms. Cash-out reliability carries the most weight, because getting your money out is what matters most. Any editor override has to be written on the review page itself.
| Check | Weight | What we measure |
|---|---|---|
| Cash-out reliability | 25 | Whether withdrawals work, how long they take and what they cost, from our editor's own withdrawals and the platform's published terms. |
| True cost per trade | 20 | Trading fees, spreads and deposit or card costs, from the platform's fee pages and our own trades. |
| California market depth | 20 | Open interest on the markets Californians actually trade: Dodgers, Lakers, Rams, 49ers, the 2026 Governor race, statewide propositions and wildfire-season contracts. |
| Regulatory footing | 15 | CFTC designation, where customer funds sit, disclosed enforcement history, and how the platform behaves when a state regulator pushes back. |
| First-hour experience | 10 | Sign-up and identity checks from a California address, placing a first order, and whether profit and loss is clear to a beginner. |
| Honest bonus value | 10 | What the promo is worth after rollover, expiry and withdrawal restrictions, scored on cash we could actually remove, not headline dollars. |
Freshness policy
Prediction-market regulation, operator availability, and bonus terms change frequently. We publish a freshness commitment so readers know exactly how recent the page they are reading is.
- Top-Apps list & individual reviews: reviewed at minimum every 30 days; bonus terms re-verified each cycle.
- California + state legality pages: reviewed monthly; same-week updates when a regulator action, court ruling, or cease-and-desist is published.
- News articles: dated at publication and not silently rewritten: material updates are added as a "Update:" block at the top.
- Evergreen guides: reviewed quarterly; obviously dated content (e.g. discontinued products) triggers an immediate revision.
Every page carries a "Last updated" date. The freshness chip near our bylines turns from cyan to grey once a page is more than one month past its last review.
Corrections policy
We will get things wrong. When we do, we want the correction process to be visible, fast, and honest.
- Acknowledge. Reader-reported errors are confirmed within 48 hours.
- Fix the page. The inline error is corrected in place: we do not silently delete the original wording.
- Add a correction note. A timestamped "Correction (month year):" block is added at the top of the page describing what changed and why.
- Material errors are escalated. If a mistake materially misled readers, we say so on the home page and on social.
Report an issue
Email editorial@venicepredictions.com with the URL and a one-line description. We respond to every report.
Read more about the team behind this work on our About page, see the full affiliate disclosure, or jump straight to the latest rankings.