Before you fund an account, it is worth knowing how a platform holds your money, what protections apply, and what they do not cover.
Custody of funds is how and where a platform holds the money you deposit and any value in your open positions. On federally regulated United States venues, customer funds are subject to the CFTC's customer protection rules, which under 17 CFR 1.20 require futures customer money to be kept separate from the platform's own operating funds. Other venues, including noncustodial crypto platforms and some outside the United States, hold funds differently and may not offer the same protections. Custody is not the same as bank deposit insurance, so check exactly how a platform holds your money and what is and is not covered before you deposit.
Illustrative comparison of two common custody models. The regulated path reflects the segregation rule at 17 CFR 1.20 and Kalshi's stated use of segregated accounts with Kalshi Klear, as of 2026. The noncustodial path reflects Polymarket's described model of USDC in a wallet you control, per its documentation as of 2026. A general illustration, not a recommendation.
When you deposit, the platform holds that balance somewhere, often at a bank or custodian, until you trade or withdraw. On regulated United States venues, customer money is generally required to be held separately from the company's own funds. Knowing where your balance sits, and in whose name, is the starting point for understanding any protection that applies.
A core idea in regulated derivatives markets is that customer money should be segregated, meaning kept apart from the platform's operating cash. Under the Commodity Exchange Act and 17 CFR 1.20, futures customer funds must be segregated and separately accounted for, a rule the CFTC describes as designed to help return funds to customers if the firm becomes insolvent. The exact rules and how strictly they apply depend on the venue and its regulator.
Segregation and regulatory oversight reduce certain risks, but they are not the same as bank deposit insurance. Customer cash may sit at an FDIC insured bank, yet FDIC insurance protects against the bank failing, not against the platform failing, per reporting as of 2026. It is important not to assume a familiar protection applies, and to read what a platform actually states about how your funds are held and what would happen in a failure.
Not every platform holds funds the same way. Some are federally regulated and segregate customer funds, some operate from outside the United States under other regimes, and some are noncustodial, holding nothing on your behalf while you keep the assets yourself. Polymarket describes a noncustodial model where USDC sits in a wallet you control, per its documentation as of 2026. The model matters, so check each platform rather than assume they are alike.
Custody also shapes how easily you can get your money back. Withdrawal methods, timing, verification checks, and any minimums or fees all affect access to your own balance. A platform can hold funds responsibly and still take time to return them, so it is worth understanding the withdrawal process before you rely on quick access.
One distinction prevents most misunderstandings about custody. On a regulated United States venue, customer funds are generally required to be segregated from the platform's own money, which is a real protection against the company treating your balance as its own. That is not the same as the deposit insurance you might have at a bank, which usually does not extend to a trading balance. Both ideas are about safety, but they cover different risks, and assuming one when you have the other is a common mistake.
General description as of June 2026. Check each platform's own disclosures for how it holds funds and what is covered.
Funding an account is the point at which understanding turns into real money at risk, so how a platform holds that money matters as much as how its markets work. Custody determines where your balance sits, what rules protect it, and how easily you can get it back. It is easy to skip past, because depositing is designed to be quick, but it is one of the more consequential things to understand before you start.
On federally regulated United States venues, the reassuring part is that customer funds fall under the CFTC's customer protection framework. Under 17 CFR 1.20, futures customer money must be segregated and separately accounted for, and a designated contract market must itself maintain rules on the custody and segregation of customer funds under 17 CFR Part 38. Kalshi states that customer funds are held in segregated accounts with Kalshi Klear, a clearing organization registered with and overseen by the CFTC under the Commodity Exchange Act, as of 2026. The intent is that your balance is not simply the company's cash to use, which is the protection that matters most if the company itself fails.
The part that trips people up is assuming this protection looks like the one they know from a bank. Customer cash may be held at an FDIC insured bank, but the FDIC protects against the failure of that bank, up to 250,000 dollars per depositor, not against the failure of the platform. If the platform itself were to fail, recovery would run through bankruptcy or regulatory receivership rather than an insurance payout, per reporting as of 2026. So while segregation reduces the risk of the company misusing your money, it does not guarantee you a fixed amount back the way insured bank deposits can. Reading what a platform actually promises, rather than assuming a familiar protection applies, is the key step.
Custody also varies a lot across the wider landscape. Some platforms are federally regulated and segregate customer funds, others operate from outside the United States under different regimes, and some are noncustodial. Polymarket, for example, describes a model where you hold USDC in a wallet you control on the Polygon network and the platform never takes possession of your funds, per its documentation as of 2026. That shifts the risk: there is no firm holding your balance to misuse it, but you carry the responsibility of keeping your own private key safe, and you take on smart contract and stablecoin price risk instead. Availability of any given venue also differs by region, and some are not available to United States residents, a position that has shifted over time and remains worth checking against current rules. Because the models differ so much, it is not safe to assume one platform handles funds like another.
Access is the quieter side of custody. Even a platform that holds funds responsibly can have withdrawal methods, timing, verification steps, and fees that affect how quickly you can reach your own money. Knowing the withdrawal process in advance, including any identity checks that must clear first, avoids the unwelcome surprise of a balance you cannot move as fast as you expected.
The honest summary is that custody is about reducing specific risks, not removing risk. Even with funds held carefully and a regulated venue, your trades can lose money, a platform can face problems, and protections have limits. We point you to read each platform's own disclosures and to verify how your money is held, because that is where the accurate answer for any particular venue lives.
The same deposit is held very differently depending on the structure behind a venue. The table sets out the broad models and what protection each does and does not carry. It describes structures, not a ranking, and availability differs by region and is not implied by inclusion here.
| Custody model | How your money is held | What it protects against | Source and date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Regulated and segregated | Customer funds in segregated accounts with a CFTC registered clearing organization; Kalshi cites Kalshi Klear | The firm commingling or misusing your balance; helps return funds on firm insolvency | 17 CFR 1.20 and Part 38; Kalshi disclosures, as of 2026 |
| Cash at an insured bank | Segregated customer cash placed at FDIC insured banks | The bank failing, up to 250,000 dollars per depositor; not the platform failing | Reporting, as of 2026 |
| Noncustodial | USDC in a wallet you control on chain; the platform never takes possession; Polymarket describes this model | A firm misusing your balance, since none is held for you; you carry key and smart contract risk instead | Polymarket documentation, as of 2026 |
| Outside the United States | Held under another country's regime, which may differ markedly from CFTC rules | Varies by jurisdiction; protections and recourse can be weaker or unclear | General; verify per venue |
Methodology: rows describe broad custody structures drawn from the cited regulations and from each platform's own published disclosures, or from reputable reporting where a platform does not publish a single statement, dated in the final column. A platform can use more than one model at once. This is general information, not a safety rating, and the rules change, so verify the current position and your own eligibility before depositing. Sources: 17 CFR 1.20 and 17 CFR Part 38 via the eCFR, current 2026; CFTC final rule on investment of customer funds, published January 2025; Kalshi member disclosures and reporting, as of 2026; Polymarket documentation, as of 2026.
Custody rules are written for the bad day, so the clearest way to understand them is to ask what would happen if the company holding your money stopped operating. On a regulated United States venue, the segregation requirement at 17 CFR 1.20 means your balance is meant to be identifiable as customer property rather than part of the firm's own assets. The aim, in the CFTC's own description of the customer protection framework, is to make it possible to return customer funds in an insolvency. That is the practical value of segregation: it is less about day to day comfort and more about who has a claim on the money if the firm collapses.
What segregation does not do is promise a fast or complete return. Recovery in a failure would run through a bankruptcy or a regulatory receivership, a process that takes time and can involve costs, and the outcome depends on the facts of the case. This is the reason the distinction from FDIC insurance matters so much. An insured bank deposit can be made whole quickly up to the insured limit when the bank fails. A segregated trading balance has a different and slower path, and the protection is against misuse and commingling rather than against every loss. Treating the two as equivalent is the single most common custody mistake.
A noncustodial venue inverts the question. Because the platform never holds your funds, its failure does not by itself put your balance at risk in the same way, since the USDC sits in a wallet you control, per Polymarket's documentation as of 2026. The trade is that the failure modes move to you and to the technology: a lost or stolen private key, a flaw in a smart contract, or a fall in the value of the stablecoin itself. Neither model removes risk. Each simply decides who holds it and where it can go wrong, which is exactly why reading a platform's own custody disclosure before you deposit is worth the few minutes it takes.
A good habit is to treat a platform's own statements about custody as required reading before your first deposit, not after a problem. Look for where customer funds are held, whether they are described as segregated from company money, what regulator if any oversees the venue, and what the platform says would happen to your balance if it failed. If those answers are hard to find or vague, that itself is useful information about how much weight to place on the balance you keep there.
It also helps to keep custody separate in your mind from the protections you know elsewhere. Do not assume bank deposit insurance, investor compensation schemes, or any familiar safety net applies to a trading balance unless the platform clearly says so. On a noncustodial venue, the responsibility shifts to you: the safety of your private key and your own care become the protection, and there is no firm to call if you lose access. When in doubt, keep less money on the platform than you would in an insured account, withdraw what you are not actively using, and verify the current rules rather than relying on an assumption.
Careful custody reduces some risks but does not remove the risk of loss, and protections have limits that differ by platform. Segregated funds are not the same as insured deposits. This page is general information, not financial or legal advice, and is current only as of its last reviewed date. Stake only what you can afford to lose, never to chase a loss, and never on borrowed money. In the United States you can call or text the helpline on 1-800-GAMBLER or visit ncpgambling.org.
Custody is one of the things to weigh when you choose a venue, alongside fees, markets, and whether it is available where you live. Use the reference pages below to compare the platforms and confirm legality for your location. We rate and explain, we do not sell, and we never point you to a platform you cannot legally use.
It is how and where a platform holds the money you deposit and the value in your open positions. Custody covers where your balance sits, in whose name, what rules or protections apply, and how you can withdraw it. It is a separate question from how the platform's markets work.
On federally regulated United States venues, customer funds fall under the CFTC's customer protection rules, which under 17 CFR 1.20 require futures customer money to be segregated from the platform's own funds. Kalshi states that customer funds are held in segregated accounts with Kalshi Klear, a CFTC registered clearing organization, as of 2026. That reduces certain risks, but it is not the same as bank deposit insurance, and you can still lose money on your trades.
Generally no. Customer cash may sit at an FDIC insured bank, but FDIC insurance protects against the bank failing, up to 250,000 dollars per depositor, not against the platform failing. If the platform itself fails, recovery would run through bankruptcy or regulatory receivership rather than FDIC, per reporting as of 2026. Read what the platform itself states.
No. Some are federally regulated and segregate customer funds, some operate from outside the United States under other regimes, and some are noncustodial, where you hold the assets yourself. Polymarket, for example, describes a noncustodial model where USDC sits in a wallet you control on the Polygon network, per its documentation as of 2026. The model varies, so check each platform.
Segregation means customer money is kept apart from the platform's own operating cash, so your balance is not simply the company's money to spend. Under the Commodity Exchange Act and 17 CFR Part 1, it is designed to help return customer funds if the firm becomes insolvent. It is a core protection in regulated derivatives markets, though the exact rules and limits depend on the venue and its regulator.
It depends on the platform. Withdrawal methods, timing, verification checks, and any fees or minimums all affect access. A venue can hold funds responsibly and still take time to return them, so it is worth understanding the withdrawal process before you rely on fast access.
The rules change fast. Get the changes that affect you, plain and current, not tips.
Independent. Every claim dated and sourced. No platform pays for its place.