Who can legally use Polymarket and Kalshi by geography?

Detailed Explanation

Geographic access is closely tied to each platform’s regulatory posture. Kalshi operates under U.S. regulation and is designed for use by U.S.-based participants who meet platform eligibility requirements. Its compliance framework enables lawful participation but also limits access to jurisdictions where it is explicitly authorized.

Polymarket, on the other hand, restricts U.S. users due to regulatory considerations and focuses on international participation. This results in a more globally diverse user base, which can influence market sentiment and pricing dynamics. For analysts and organizations, understanding who is allowed to participate is critical, as geographic composition affects information flow, bias, and representativeness of market prices.

Common Scenarios

• Evaluating whether market prices reflect U.S. or global sentiment
• Assessing compliance risks for internal use
• Comparing participation breadth across platforms
• Interpreting divergent prices between markets

Exceptions & Edge Cases

• If access rules change, then liquidity and participation may shift abruptly.
• If users participate indirectly, then geographic signals may blur.
• If markets are dominated by one region, then bias risk increases.

Practical Examples

• A U.S. policy market shows tighter pricing on Kalshi than Polymarket.
• The difference reflects who can legally trade on each platform.

Actionable Takeaways

• ✅ Identify the participant base behind a price
• ✅ Factor geography into signal interpretation
• ✅ Avoid assuming global consensus from restricted markets
• ✅ Track regulatory changes affecting access

‍