Share 
Prediction markets are having a moment. Trading volumes are spiking, regulators are circling, and the sports betting world is watching closely. Still, if you ask FanDuel CEO Amy Howe, there is no reason to panic.
In a recent CNBC appearance, Howe pushed back on the idea that prediction markets are siphoning meaningful dollars away from regulated sportsbooks. Her message was simple: They are not the same thing, and bettors know the difference.
Depth vs. simplicity: The battle for the bettor
Howe described prediction markets as closer in spirit to daily fantasy sports (DFS) than to a fully built-out sportsbook. That distinction matters.
A regulated sportsbook offers layers of options: pregame lines, player props, same-game parlays, and live in-play betting that shifts with every possession. Bettors can jump in and out of markets in real time across dozens of events.
Prediction markets tend to revolve around broader, outcome-based contracts. You buy into a result and wait to see how it plays out. That format can be compelling, especially in states like California where sports betting is still illegal, but it lacks the depth and immediacy that define traditional wagering in regulated states.
Howe said she is not “terribly concerned” about major cannibalization in states where sports betting is already legal. FanDuel’s focus remains on expanding legislation in large holdout states like California and Texas rather than chasing competitors in murkier regulatory territory.
Integrity oversight remains the gold standard
Oversight has become a central part of the conversation. The NFL and the American Gaming Association have both raised questions about how prediction markets handle integrity monitoring. Howe countered by emphasizing the infrastructure that licensed sportsbooks already have in place.
She pointed to a real-world example: FanDuel once identified suspicious betting activity involving an NBA player before tipoff. The company flagged it and coordinated directly with league officials. That kind of direct line, she argued, only exists within a regulated framework.
Legal sportsbooks operate under state licenses, formal compliance programs, and data-sharing agreements. Those guardrails are not theoretical; they are active systems designed to catch irregularities early.
Addressing the state tax imbalance
Taxes are another fault line. Many states, including New York sportsbooks, pay steep rates, with New York sitting at 51% of revenue. Prediction markets often do not face comparable state-level tax obligations.
Howe suggested this difference gives prediction platforms more flexibility to reinvest in customer acquisition and marketing. Licensed sportsbooks, meanwhile, contribute directly to state coffers while carrying the cost of compliance and oversight. That imbalance fuels some of the competitive tension, even if the products are not identical.
Beyond the Super Bowl surge
CNBC noted that one major prediction market saw trading volume jump nearly 1,400% in the weeks leading up to Super Bowl 60. That surge has drawn attention from regulators and industry stakeholders alike.
In response, the platform announced plans to create an independent oversight committee and publish transparency reports. Those moves signal an effort to address mounting compliance concerns as visibility into the company’s operations increases.
The segment wrapped with a reminder of how sensitive big events can be. Even stars like Tom Brady have avoided publicly picking a Super Bowl winner, highlighting how reputational and commercial stakes now surround major sporting moments.
Prediction markets may be expanding quickly, but FanDuel’s leadership appears confident that regulated sportsbooks still offer a fundamentally different, more robust experience. From Howe’s perspective, the real battle is not product versus product—it is about who operates inside the rules and who does not.
