Compare
Compare venues
Scale, products, trading behavior, costs and accuracy, using the broadest comparable evidence available for each question.
Broadest coverage
How large is each venue?
Reported volume, recent momentum, market share, and the narrower set of published open-interest series.
Broad coverage
What does each venue trade?
Sports, non-sports, categories, and concentration after normalizing incompatible venue labels.
Partial coverage
Where are parlays taking hold?
Adoption, leg counts, and composition only for venues that identify multi-leg products.
Uneven detail
How do people trade?
Trade size and behavior where public prints exist; not every venue exposes aggressor or participant identity.
Schedules > realized data
What does trading cost?
Published fee schedules compare broadly. Realized fee revenue and participant economics are much narrower.
Settled samples only
How accurate are prices?
Calibration and outcomes for venues with settled contracts, usable prices, and enough observations.
Coverage
The common measure can be narrower than the deepest data available for any one venue.
| Lens | Strongest common measure | What remains limited |
|---|---|---|
| Scale | Reported contracts by day | Open interest and intraday liquidity |
| Products | Sports/non-sports and broad categories | Venue taxonomies require mapping |
| Parlays | Share of volume where identified | Product flags and outcome detail |
| Trading behavior | Trade-size distributions where prints exist | Aggressor and participant identity |
| Economics | Published fee schedules | Realized revenue and bettor P&L |
| Accuracy | Actual versus implied outcomes | Sample size, settlement history, and void handling |
Comparison rule: when a metric is only credible for one venue, it stays in that venue’s deep dive rather than becoming a one-row “industry” ranking.