The U.S. House committee investigating prediction markets has expanded its probe to Hyperliquid and Crypto.com, along with Aristotle Exchange, seeking information about identity verification and systems for detecting, investigating and reporting suspicious trading.
🚨 NEW: Our investigation into insider trading on prediction markets is expanding.
We’ve received nearly 1,000 docs and 5 briefings from Polymarket and Kalshi.
We’re demanding answers from Hyperliquid Labs, Crypto․com & Aristotle Exchange.https://t.co/E5wtlgVfQi
— Oversight Committee (@GOPoversight) September 29, 2026
Chairman James Comer requested documents from the three companies as lawmakers examine whether traders may have used nonpublic information. The investigation began in May with requests to Kalshi and Polymarket and remains focused on how prediction-market platforms verify users and prevent potentially improper trading.
In his letter to Hyperliquid CEO Jeff Yan, Comer pointed to a large leveraged short position reportedly opened shortly before a presidential announcement concerning U.S. tariff policy in October 2025.
The timing raised questions for the committee because the government decision was reportedly not publicly known when the position was established. Comer also questioned Hyperliquid’s identity-verification procedures and its ability to identify and refer suspected misconduct to U.S. law enforcement.
The committee’s letter does not establish that the trader had access to nonpublic information or that the transaction constituted insider trading.
The scrutiny of Hyperliquid also comes after the Justice Department charged two former Robinhood engineers in September. Prosecutors allege that the former employees used confidential information about upcoming crypto listings to trade perpetual futures on Hyperliquid.
According to prosecutors, each defendant made more than $50,000 from the alleged scheme. The charges are accusations, and the defendants are presumed innocent.
The requests sent to Crypto.com and Aristotle Exchange cover similar areas. The committee wants documents and communications relating to know-your-customer procedures and the systems used to identify, investigate and report potentially suspicious trading.
Crypto.com has also been expanding its U.S. derivatives operations. In September, Prospect Markets said it had reached an agreement with Crypto.com’s derivatives business and OG Prediction Markets to launch a U.S. event-contract offering.
Separately, Crypto.com’s North American Derivatives Exchange registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission for security futures products in September.
The House investigation began in May, when Comer sought information from Kalshi and Polymarket about identity verification, geographic restrictions and systems for monitoring suspicious activity. The committee said it was examining whether traders were using nonpublic information to trade contracts linked to political and other events.
Since then, the committee says it has received nearly 1,000 documents and five briefings from representatives of the two companies. The investigation follows several incidents that have drawn attention to the possibility of traders using private information in prediction markets.
One case involved a U.S. soldier who was arrested in April and accused of using inside information to trade on Polymarket around the removal of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro. Another involved former U.S. Representative George Santos, who was accused of betting on Kalshi on whether he would attend the State of the Union while publicly discussing his expected attendance.
Kalshi later permanently banned Santos and fined him $71,356, according to the supplied report. These incidents form part of the broader questions lawmakers are examining around access to nonpublic information and the controls used by event-contract platforms.
The inquiry comes as prediction markets expand beyond traditional election and sports contracts. Platforms are increasingly offering contracts linked to economic developments, financial markets and other events, bringing them closer to areas traditionally associated with derivatives markets.
That expansion has attracted attention from both lawmakers and regulators. Questions include how prediction markets should be supervised, how insider trading rules should apply and where the boundary lies between event contracts and other financial products.
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission is also examining aspects of prediction-market activity, while disputes involving state regulators have created separate questions about federal and state authority.
The latest House requests bring three additional platforms into the committee’s review. The focus remains on how these companies verify customers, monitor trading and respond when activity potentially involves information that was not publicly available.
Stay informed with the latest trends in Web3, blockchain innovation, and cybersecurity updates at 3verseTV
You need to login in order to Like
Leave a comment