Inside Connamara’s Infrastructure Layer Powering Prediction Markets

An Interview with Chief Revenue Officer, Daniel Davis.

Originally published in A-Team Insight‘s TradingTech Insight Awards USA 2026 Winner’s Report.

Until fairly recently, the central question facing US prediction markets was whether they would exist at all – whether regulators would tolerate event contracts, whether retail venues could clear the institutional bar, whether the category was anything more than a niche curiosity at the edge of financial markets. The questions now are practical ones: how prediction markets operate at institutional scale, how they integrate with the broader market ecosystem, and how oversight extends across an exchange’s full operational footprint, not just its order book. Connamara Technologies sits beneath much of that activity. Its EP3® platform – an integrated exchange, clearing, and surveillance system – powers a majority of the new CFTC-licensed venues launched since 2024, including ForecastEx, Railbird, and ElectronX. On Election Night 2024, EP3 cleared $560 million in US election prediction contracts for ForecastEx, according to the firm – a public stress test for a category that until recently had operated mostly at the margins. EP3 was named Best Matching Engine for Prediction / Event Markets at the TradingTech Insight USA Awards 2026. We spoke to Daniel Davis, Chief Revenue Officer at Connamara Technologies, about what the recognition reflects, how the category has matured, and where the infrastructure beneath these markets goes next.

TTI: EP3 has been named Best Matching Engine for Prediction / Event Markets at the TradingTech Insight USA Awards. What does this recognition mean to Connamara, and how does it reflect where the business is today?

DD: We’re honored by the recognition, but what excites us most is what it says about the market. Prediction markets have evolved from a niche category into a serious segment of regulated finance, and that requires institutional-grade technology. The award reflects the success of our clients as much as our technology. Firms are launching exchanges, clearinghouses, and new asset classes on EP3 because they need technology that is resilient, scalable, and regulatory-ready from day one. More broadly, it reflects our evolution as a company. We are no longer just building matching engines. We are helping operators build and run entire markets.

TTI: Prediction and event markets have moved from a niche curiosity to a serious institutional category in a remarkably short space of time. From your vantage point as the technology layer beneath many of these venues, what’s actually driving that shift – and what’s changed in the conversations you’re having with prospective operators over the past 18 months?

DD: The biggest change is legitimacy. Eighteen months ago, the conversation was whether prediction markets would survive regulatory scrutiny. Today, the conversation is about scale, liquidity, clearing, and institutional access. Regulated venues have proven there is demand. Brokers and market makers are getting involved, and institutions increasingly view event contracts as another way to express risk. The market has moved from proving it can exist to figuring out how to operate at institutional scale. That is where we are seeing the most interest and investment.

TTI: Why are so many newly regulated exchanges and clearinghouses choosing to launch on EP3?

DD: Operators launching regulated markets need more than a matching engine. They need a foundation they can grow on. What resonates with customers is the combination of speed, flexibility, and regulatory readiness. They can launch quickly without sacrificing long-term scalability. Just as importantly, EP3 supports multiple asset classes and market models on a common platform. That gives operators the flexibility to evolve their business without rebuilding their core technology. Ultimately, we help firms reduce the distance between an idea and a live regulated market.

TTI: EP3’s architecture integrates matching, clearing, and surveillance within a single platform, rather than relying on best-of-breed components stitched together. What does that integrated model unlock for operators that a more modular, multi-vendor stack can’t – and where, if anywhere, does the trade-off cut the other way?

DD: The biggest benefit is a shared source of truth. Many market operators spend enormous amounts of time and money reconciling data across trading, clearing, risk, and surveillance systems. Every handoff introduces latency, complexity, and operational risk. By integrating those functions on a common platform, operators gain a more complete view of market activity and can respond to risk, compliance, and operational events more quickly. 11 www.tradingtechinsight.com2026 There are certainly cases where firms may want specialized third-party solutions, and we support that. But for many operators, especially new exchanges and clearinghouses, reducing complexity is often more valuable than adding another vendor.

TTI: Election Night 2024 saw ForecastEx clear $560 million in US election prediction contracts on EP3 – a genuine stress-test moment for the category. What did that night look like from your side, and what did it confirm or change about how you think about resilience and capacity in event-driven markets?

DD: Election Night was a defining moment for the category. Unlike traditional markets, prediction markets experience concentrated bursts of activity when new information arrives. Volume, volatility, risk calculations, and settlement activity can all spike simultaneously. For us, it was validation that event-driven markets require technology built for those moments. Capacity is important, but so are observability, operational readiness, and the ability to scale across the entire market lifecycle. The biggest takeaway was that prediction and event markets are no longer experimental. They are operating at a scale where resilience and reliability are table stakes.

TTI: The platform spans binary and multi-outcome event contracts, regulated derivatives, tokenised real-world assets, energy and climate markets, and digital assets. How much of the underlying technology genuinely transfers across those asset classes, and where do operators still need meaningfully different capabilities?

DD: More than most people think. At their core, markets share many of the same requirements: matching, clearing, risk management, surveillance, market data, and regulatory reporting. What changes is the product model and risk profile, not the fundamental technology. We designed EP3 around that principle. A market operator should not have to rebuild their technology stack every time they launch a new product or enter a new asset class. Reusable technology accelerates innovation and reduces operational risk.

TTI: Prediction markets sit at an unusual intersection of retail accessibility, institutional capital, and regulatory scrutiny – with the CFTC, state regulators, and the courts all actively shaping the perimeter. How is that environment influencing the capabilities operators are asking you to build, particularly around surveillance and compliance?

DD: As markets mature, expectations around oversight mature with them. Most discussions around surveillance focus on trading activity, such as market manipulation, insider information, or abusive trading behavior. Those are certainly important, but regulated exchanges and clearinghouses also need visibility into operational activity. 12 www.tradingtechinsight.com2026 Many of the highest-risk events in a market are not trades. They are balance adjustments, manual interventions, permissions changes, contract resolutions, settlement actions, or other administrative activities that can directly impact participants and market integrity. As a result, we’re seeing growing demand for operational surveillance alongside traditional market surveillance. Exchanges want automated alerts, four-eye approval workflows, audit trails, and controls that help operators identify unusual activity before it becomes a regulatory or operational issue. The broader trend is that regulators and market operators increasingly expect oversight of the entire exchange lifecycle, not just the order book. Surveillance is evolving from monitoring trading activity to monitoring the operation of the market itself.

TTI: Looking into 2026 and beyond, where do you see EP3 – and the prediction and event markets category more broadly – heading? Are there specific products, asset classes, or operator types you expect to drive the next phase of growth?

DD: The next phase of growth will be driven by connectivity and institutional participation. The first chapter of prediction and event markets was proving they could exist. The next chapter is integrating them into the broader financial ecosystem through brokers, market makers, clearing firms, and institutional workflows. We expect to see continued growth in event contracts, tokenized assets, environmental products, power/compute, and other emerging market categories. More importantly, we expect those markets to become increasingly interconnected. The long-term opportunity is not a collection of isolated venues. It’s an ecosystem where liquidity, pricing, and risk can move efficiently across markets. That is the technology we are building toward. The shape of the next phase is becoming clearer. Connectivity and institutional participation – brokers, market makers, clearing firms routing flow into event contracts the way they route flow into any other instrument – will determine whether prediction markets stay a self-contained category or become a routine layer of the wider market ecosystem. The infrastructure beneath them is being asked to support that transition: not just to match orders at scale, but to interoperate with the rest of the financial plumbing. The expansion of surveillance is part of that same maturation. Regulated venues are increasingly expected to monitor the operational lifecycle of the exchange itself – balance adjustments, manual interventions, contract resolutions and administrative actions – alongside the order book. Whether that becomes a defining feature of regulated prediction markets specifically, or a baseline expectation across electronic venues more broadly, is one of the open questions worth tracking through 2026.