Polymarket US has started beta testing parlay contracts after self-certifying its new product with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, but access remains limited as the platform refines its multi-outcome trading system
Polymarket’s regulated US exchange has entered beta testing for its new parlay contracts, following a self-certification filing with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) in May. The move marks a significant step for the prediction market as it works to expand multi-outcome trading options for US users, though the product remains in a restricted test phase and is not yet broadly available.
Beta Launch and Regulatory Status
The beta test of Polymarket’s parlay contracts—formally called Combinatorial Athletic Outcome Contracts (CAOCs)—comes after the company submitted a self-certification to the CFTC. This regulatory step is required for new event contract products to be offered on a designated contract market in the US. Despite the filing, the contracts were not immediately released to the public, and the current beta is limited to a controlled environment rather than a full market launch.
According to available data, Polymarket US processed its first parlay trade on August 5. Since then, the test environment has recorded approximately $7.4 million in trading volume across 16,173 trades, with most activity occurring in recent days. These figures reflect test-phase activity and do not represent a full commercial rollout.
Product Features and Player Access
During the beta, users can combine up to 10 legs in a single parlay, according to Polymarket US API documentation. This structure allows traders to link multiple outcomes into one contract, but the maximum number of legs is lower than some competing prediction market products. The parlay feature is not yet available through the Polymarket US app, and the desktop platform has not been widely launched. All current trades are part of the ongoing beta test, and general user access remains restricted.
Polymarket’s US platform has introduced parlay contracts later than its offshore blockchain-based counterpart, which began offering parlays during the FIFA World Cup in June. The US product’s rollout is subject to additional regulatory requirements and market testing before any broader launch can occur.
Request-for-Quote System and Market Competition
Polymarket uses a request-for-quote (RFQ) system to price parlay contracts. Under this model, traders submit a request for a specific combination, and market makers have a set period to respond with pricing. The trader can then accept the best available offer. This approach is designed to enable pricing of complex multi-outcome combinations, though casual users typically access only the “yes” side of a parlay through the standard interface.
The beta launch comes as other prediction markets, including Kalshi, expand their own parlay offerings. Kalshi is preparing to introduce maker fees for its parlay contracts, with rates expected to follow its existing fee structure. According to reporting, Kalshi generated $25 million in parlay taker fees during the first 16 days of August, highlighting the growing importance of parlays as a source of activity and fees in the event contract space.
While Polymarket’s parlay contracts are currently in beta and not available to the general public, the company’s regulatory filings and test activity indicate a push toward broader multi-outcome trading in the US prediction market sector. The timeline for a full public launch remains uncertain and will depend on further regulatory review and product refinement.
Parlay contracts in prediction markets allow users to combine multiple event outcomes into a single contract, with the payout dependent on all selected outcomes occurring. Unlike traditional sportsbook parlays, these contracts are regulated as event contracts under CFTC oversight, and their structure, pricing, and availability are subject to federal rules. The request-for-quote system used by Polymarket is intended to facilitate pricing for complex combinations, but access and terms can vary significantly between platforms and regulatory jurisdictions.
