Prediction market operator Kalshi is expanding how its real-time trading information reaches market participants by partnering with DoubleZero Edge for distribution via DoubleZero’s dedicated fiber network. In a Wednesday announcement shared with Cointelegraph, the companies said Kalshi’s live order book feed for certain sports and crypto perpetuals event contracts will be made available to new DoubleZero Edge subscribers.

The integration targets a long-standing gap in prediction market infrastructure: access to fast, machine-readable market data. Rather than building bespoke systems that reconstruct order books from raw exchange screens or parse multiple API endpoints, subscribers can consume a dedicated data feed designed to deliver order book data directly.

Key takeaways

• Kalshi’s real-time order book for sports and crypto perpetuals event contracts is now distributed through DoubleZero Edge’s fiber network.
• DoubleZero Edge positions the feed as a way to avoid rebuilding infrastructure from order books and API responses.
• Sports appears as one of Kalshi’s biggest demand categories, with crypto also ranking among the top segments by weekly notional volume.
• The rollout arrives as Kalshi remains involved in ongoing regulatory disputes over whether its event contracts are sports wagers or CFTC-regulated derivatives.

Dedicated fiber distribution for prediction market order books

Kalshi said the new offering makes it the first prediction market to distribute its live order book data through DoubleZero Edge’s dedicated fiber network for sports and crypto perpetuals event contracts. For institutional and technical users, the practical value is straightforward: lower latency pathways and a consistent, machine-friendly way to ingest market depth and price levels as trades happen.

DoubleZero co-founder Austin Federa described data access as a core component of market structure, arguing that infrastructure has lagged behind “new financial paradigms” that include crypto, perpetuals, and prediction markets. The pitch here is that the industry has continued to grow without matching the data distribution capabilities usually expected in traditional, high-speed markets—especially for participants who run automated strategies.

Where Kalshi’s volumes come from

Kalshi’s focus areas are not limited to crypto. According to Dune data cited in the announcement, sports accounts for 37.8% of Kalshi’s weekly notional volume, while crypto ranks third at 20.3%. Exotics, meanwhile, lead the mix at 39.4% of weekly notional trading volume.

Those proportions matter because they suggest the network-based data distribution may reach more than a niche slice of traders. A dedicated feed for sports-linked markets could be particularly relevant for participants who need to track changing probabilities and liquidity across event timelines, while crypto perpetuals event contracts add additional complexity that favors fast data ingestion.

Broader visibility, including ChatGPT search

The order book distribution comes amid increasing visibility of Kalshi markets in mainstream discovery channels. In early July, Cointelegraph reported that OpenAI began displaying Kalshi’s prediction market odds for FIFA World Cup matches in ChatGPT search results.

While that development relates more to consumer-facing access than to institutional infrastructure, it underscores how prediction markets are becoming more embedded in the information layer that users interact with—creating more pressure for robust, reliable data pathways underneath.

Regulatory pressure remains a central backdrop

Kalshi’s sports event contracts continue to sit at the center of a regulatory dispute involving state regulators and the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). The disagreement centers on how the contracts should be classified.

State authorities argue the products are essentially wagers subject to state gambling laws. Kalshi and the CFTC, by contrast, contend that these event contracts are derivatives that fall under the CFTC’s exclusive jurisdiction.

The legal conflict has already produced concrete restrictions. On June 29, a Michigan judge temporarily blocked Kalshi from allowing residents to place bets on sporting events. Earlier, Kentucky sued five prediction market platforms—including Kalshi and Polymarket—accusing them of operating unlicensed sports betting platforms. Nevada also issued a temporary ban on Kalshi earlier in March.

Meanwhile, the CFTC has taken an offensive stance as well, suing several states—arguing that federally regulated event contracts should fall under its authority. According to earlier Cointelegraph reporting, the CFTC’s legal actions are aimed at reinforcing the agency’s jurisdiction over products it views as derivatives.

In that context, better market data infrastructure may help participants operate more effectively, but it does not resolve the classification question that determines where and how these markets can be offered. Traders and developers looking at the space may therefore see two parallel tracks: technical maturation through data distribution, and legal outcomes that determine geographic reach.

Looking ahead, readers should watch whether improved access to real-time order book feeds accelerates participation from professional market makers and automated traders—and whether regulatory decisions continue to constrain Kalshi’s ability to offer sports-linked contracts in key jurisdictions.

The Intercept and Freedom of the Press Foundation have sued President Donald Trump over a Truth Social service charging up to $100,000 monthly for faster access to posts that may move U.S. financial markets.

Truth Social lawsuit targets preferential access

The Intercept and Freedom of the Press Foundation filed the complaint Wednesday in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, according to an Associated Press report. The case names Trump, Trump Media & Technology Group, and White House aides Daniel Scavino and Natalie Harp among the defendants.

Seeking declaratory and injunctive relief, the plaintiffs want the court to stop the administration from giving paying Truth API customers preferential access to presidential posts containing official U.S. policy announcements. The complaint also challenges what the plaintiffs describe as an exclusive arrangement under which Trump uses Truth Social to release government information.

Trump Media introduced Truth API in July and opened it to institutional customers on Aug. 1. As crypto.news previously reported, the company markets the low-latency feed to algorithmic trading firms, financial data providers, and media companies that need machine-readable posts within milliseconds.

Interim CEO Kevin McGurn has said monthly contracts range from about $60,000 to $100,000. Trump Media disclosed in its latest earnings materials that it had signed more than 10 customer agreements and was already earning revenue from the product, although it has not identified the subscribers.

Most customers are high-frequency trading firms, according to reports cited in the lawsuit. Such companies use automated systems capable of reading information and placing trades faster than ordinary investors who depend on Truth Social’s website, mobile notifications, or reports from news organizations.

Trump Media has described Truth API as a licensed alternative to companies scraping data from social platforms. McGurn previously said, “Markets already move on Truth Social posts,” while presenting the service as a new source of recurring revenue for the company.

Plaintiffs say presidential statements are a public benefit

Under its First Amendment claim, the lawsuit argues that the president cannot give paying customers an advantage in accessing official announcements while journalists and members of the public receive the same information later. The plaintiffs allege that the arrangement interferes with the press’s ability to report government news on equal terms.

Trump routinely uses Truth Social to announce or discuss tariffs, appointments, foreign policy, and other federal decisions. According to the complaint, statements covering those subjects can affect stocks, currencies, commodities, and digital assets, making even a short delivery advantage valuable to automated trading firms.

The Fifth Amendment claim rests on a separate argument. The plaintiffs contend that the government cannot place an unreasonable financial condition on access to a public benefit, including official presidential information. No court has ruled on the merits of either constitutional claim, and the allegations remain unproven.

“Nothing could be more antithetical to the free, independent press than the president charging for early access to his public announcements,” The Intercept Chief Legal Officer David Bralow said.

Trump Media rejected the allegations in a statement reported by the Associated Press. The company compared its product with subscription data services offered across the media industry and accused the groups behind the case of trying to silence Trump and harm the company’s shareholders.

The $100,000 feed raises U.S. market questions

For American investors, the dispute concerns whether all market participants receive presidential information at the same time. Truth API’s customers can send posts directly into automated trading systems, while a retail investor may need to open the platform, read the statement, and place an order manually.

A faster data feed does not, by itself, establish insider trading under U.S. law. In its Aug. 2 coverage, crypto.news noted that federal insider-trading cases generally require evidence involving material nonpublic information and a breach of duty, while Truth Media maintains that the underlying posts remain publicly available.

Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Adam Schiff had already asked Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Paul Atkins to examine whether the product conflicts with federal securities law or damages market fairness. The SEC acknowledged receiving their letter but had not publicly announced an investigation, enforcement action or legal finding when Truth API launched.

Lawmakers focused partly on the timing of delivery. Their letter asked whether paying subscribers receive any information before regular Truth Social users and whether the president’s financial connection to the platform creates a conflict when official statements generate commercial revenue.

A separate case has shown why access to government information matters to U.S. trading regulators. In July, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission began examining a White House teleprompter operator who allegedly earned more than $90,000 from Kalshi contracts tied to words Trump would use during speeches, according to earlier Kalshi coverage. Kalshi reportedly froze most of the gains after flagging the activity.

No regulator or court has found that Truth API customers traded on confidential information. The lawsuit instead asks whether the administration may route official communications through a president-linked company that sells faster delivery to firms equipped to act on them.

Trump Media ownership forms part of the complaint

Trump’s financial interest in Trump Media is another part of the plaintiffs’ case. Company disclosures show that the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust holds about 41% of Trump Media’s shares, while Trump serves as the trust’s settlor and sole beneficiary. Donald Trump Jr. is the trust’s sole trustee.

The holding has recently been valued at more than $1 billion, although its value changes with the price of Trump Media shares. Revenue from Truth API goes to the Nasdaq-listed company rather than directly to Trump, but the complaint argues that a successful paid feed could benefit a business in which his trust owns a large stake.

Trump Media’s financial position gives the service added importance. According to recent earnings coverage, the company recorded a $238.1 million second-quarter net loss and generated $1.67 million in revenue. Its quarterly results also included $190.4 million in unrealized losses across digital assets and securities.

Alongside Truth Social, the company operates Truth+ and Truth.Fi, and holds Bitcoin and Cronos on its balance sheet. Its reported Bitcoin holdings reached 14,139 BTC by July 31, while some coins were pledged against convertible notes or used in an options strategy.

None of Truth API’s revenue appeared in the second-quarter figures because the service began operating after June 30. Trump Media said in its earnings materials that signed customer agreements were producing revenue, but it did not disclose the amount earned or the duration of individual contracts.

The lawsuit asks the Manhattan federal court to declare the preferential arrangement unlawful and prevent Trump and White House staff from supplying paid customers with faster access to official announcements. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, Yale Law School’s Media Freedom and Information Access Clinic, the Public Integrity Project, and Altshuler Berzon LLP represent the plaintiffs.

Anchorpoint Financial has appointed HashKey Exchange as an authorized distributor for its Hong Kong dollar-backed stablecoin HKDAP, giving eligible institutions and professional investors access to minting, redemption, and fiat conversion during the token’s beta rollout.

HashKey opens HKDAP access to eligible investors

According to an Aug. 12 announcement from HashKey Exchange and Anchorpoint Financial, HashKey will support the distribution, trading, and related services for HKDAP as one of the stablecoin’s authorized distributors.

Access remains limited during the beta stage. Eligible institutions and professional investors can obtain the token through HashKey’s app and other supported channels, while retail customers have not yet been included in the rollout.

HashKey has also processed its first HKDAP minting and redemption transaction with eligible clients. The completed transaction covered the conversion of fiat currency into HKDAP and the redemption of the stablecoin back into fiat, providing an initial test of the token’s on- and off-ramp process.

Authorized distributors serve as an operational link between Anchorpoint, which issues HKDAP, and approved customers seeking to use or redeem it. Under the distribution model, HashKey can use its existing institutional network and licensed exchange infrastructure instead of Anchorpoint serving every client directly.

Haiyang Ru, CEO of HashKey Exchange, said the platform would connect the issuer with financial institutions and market participants while providing “compliant, secure, and convenient market access and circulation support for HKDAP.”

As demand and operational capacity develop, both companies plan to introduce other access channels. Their announcement identified cross-border payments, settlement services, and tokenized finance as areas where HKDAP could be tested.

HKDAP rollout follows Anchorpoint’s phased launch

HKDAP, short for HKD At Par, is designed as tokenized Hong Kong dollar money for financial and commercial transactions. Anchorpoint describes the stablecoin as a payment and settlement instrument rather than a token created primarily for speculative trading.

Anchorpoint began the first stage of the HKDAP rollout with access limited to institutional distributors, corporate users, and professional investors. Dominic Maffei, the company’s CEO and co-founder, said its immediate focus was on commercial applications involving “regulated tokenised money in real-world settings, including payments and settlement use cases.”

The issuer is using a business-to-business-to-consumer structure under which distributors and application partners connect HKDAP with potential users. Reuters reported on Aug. 12 that Anchorpoint could extend access to retail customers by the end of 2026, depending on market conditions.

HashKey’s appointment follows months of technical and regulatory preparation. On Aug. 3, crypto.news reported on Anchorpoint’s rollout after the project moved past its earlier second-quarter and end-of-July schedules.

During those preparations, Anchorpoint worked with OSL Group and PantherTrade on an Ethereum mainnet test in May. The trial covered fiat funding, issuance, transfer, and redemption, testing a complete transaction cycle on public blockchain infrastructure.

OSL has also been identified as an authorized HKDAP distributor, according to separate company announcements. The use of multiple distributors gives approved institutions more than one channel for minting and redeeming the stablecoin during its controlled release.

Anchorpoint was created by Standard Chartered Bank (Hong Kong), telecommunications company HKT, and Web3 investment firm Animoca Brands. The three companies established the joint venture in February 2025 after taking part in the Hong Kong Monetary Authority’s stablecoin issuer sandbox.

Standard Chartered contributes banking and payment infrastructure to the project, while HKT brings telecommunications and mobile-payment experience. Animoca provides digital-asset and Web3 expertise, including potential links to tokenized assets and blockchain applications.

Hong Kong stablecoin rules govern HKDAP distribution

Anchorpoint received one of Hong Kong’s first stablecoin issuer licenses from the HKMA in April 2026, alongside HSBC. The approvals allowed both companies to issue fiat-referenced stablecoins under the Stablecoins Ordinance, which took effect on Aug. 1, 2025.

As previously covered by crypto.news, Hong Kong officials expected the first licensed tokens to enter circulation between the middle and second half of 2026. The timetable depended on each issuer’s business plan and readiness to meet continuing regulatory requirements.

Under the city’s framework, an issuer must obtain HKMA authorization to issue a covered stablecoin in Hong Kong or a token tied to the Hong Kong dollar outside the territory. The regulator also requires licensed issuers to maintain eligible reserve assets, process redemptions at par, and operate risk-management, governance and anti-money laundering controls.

HKDAP is intended to maintain a one-to-one value against the Hong Kong dollar using liquid Hong Kong dollar-denominated reserve assets. Anchorpoint has said those reserves will be held separately in line with the requirements applied to licensed fiat-referenced stablecoin issuers.

Only stablecoins issued by licensed firms can be offered to retail customers in Hong Kong under the ordinance. Authorized institutions, licensed virtual-asset trading platforms, and other approved entities may offer covered tokens, subject to the applicable distribution rules.

Hong Kong authorities have already warned users to distinguish official HKDAP channels from unauthorized tokens. In April, the HKMA said counterfeit assets using the names of HSBC and HKDAP had appeared before either licensed issuer began circulation.

Anchorpoint responded by asking users to rely on verified sources and regulated acquisition channels. The earlier counterfeit token warning also noted that the regulator can investigate misconduct, impose fines, suspend operations, or revoke an issuer’s license for regulatory failures.

HashKey’s authorized status gives approved users an identified channel for accessing HKDAP during the beta stage. The companies have not disclosed the stablecoin’s current circulation, the value of HashKey’s first transaction, or the number of clients admitted to the program.

U.S. rules limit automatic access to foreign stablecoins

HKDAP’s Hong Kong license does not automatically authorize its sale or distribution in the United States. American access would depend on whether Anchorpoint and any participating platform meet the requirements governing foreign-issued payment stablecoins under U.S. law.

The GENIUS Act created a federal framework for payment stablecoins in July 2025. According to an April 2026 U.S. Treasury proposal, permitted payment stablecoin issuers must meet Bank Secrecy Act obligations and maintain effective anti-money laundering and sanctions compliance programs.

Federal implementation materials also state that foreign payment stablecoin issuers may offer tokens in the United States only when they satisfy the law’s applicable conditions. Anchorpoint and HashKey have not announced U.S. distribution for HKDAP, and the beta program described in their statement covers eligible investors using supported channels.

Dollar-linked tokens continue to control most of the global stablecoin market, leaving Hong Kong dollar products with a much smaller starting base. Reliable public figures for licensed HKD stablecoin circulation remain limited because the first products have only entered their initial distribution phases.

Citi estimated in a 2025 report that stablecoins circulating through Hong Kong platforms could eventually reach about $16 billion, or HK$124.8 billion, although the bank attached a range of roughly $8 billion around its estimate. The projection was based partly on the experience of payment institutions in mainland China rather than established HKDAP circulation data.

Meanwhile, Bernstein reported that adjusted transaction volume for Tether’s USDT and Circle’s USDC reached about $3.8 trillion during the first quarter of 2026, illustrating the transaction base already held by the two leading U.S. dollar-pegged stablecoins.

Hawaii has enacted an October 1 ban on cash-to-crypto kiosk transactions after the FBI recorded 92 related complaints and $3.85 million in adjusted losses among state residents in 2025.

Hawaii’s enacted House Bill 1642, signed by Governor Josh Green on July 9 as Act 224, prohibits operators from owning, managing, or running a kiosk that accepts U.S. currency in return for a digital financial asset.

The restriction will apply from Oct. 1, with each prohibited transaction treated as a separate offense under the state’s consumer protection law. Hawaii lawmakers passed the final version on May 6 before sending it to Green.

Although some reports have described the measure as a total crypto ATM ban, the enacted text covers deposits used to buy digital assets rather than every service offered by the machines. Operators may continue running kiosks that accept crypto in exchange for another digital asset or U.S. currency.

As a result, Hawaii residents will no longer be able to insert cash into a kiosk to purchase Bitcoin or another cryptocurrency, but the law does not prevent them from selling crypto for dollars at an eligible machine. It also does not prohibit buying, selling, or holding digital assets through online platforms that remain legally available in the state.

Hawaii crypto ATM law targets cash deposits

Under Act 224, a digital financial asset transaction kiosk means an electronic device that can accept or dispense U.S. currency through cash or a payment card in exchange for a digital asset. The definition excludes certain merchant rewards, assets used only within online games, and securities registered or exempt from registration under federal or Hawaii securities law.

Hawaii lawmakers focused on the cash deposit function because scammers commonly direct victims to withdraw banknotes and send the money through a kiosk. According to the legislature’s findings, criminals often pose as government officers, bank workers, technical support staff, or company representatives before giving victims step-by-step payment instructions.

Once a victim reaches a machine, the scammer may remain on the phone, supply a wallet address or QR code, and explain how to get past warnings displayed by the operator, the findings said. After the transaction clears, criminals can route the digital assets through other wallets or offshore platforms, limiting the victim’s chance of recovering the money.

The legislature cited investigations by the attorneys general of Iowa and the District of Columbia, which found that fraudulent activity accounted for a large share of transactions at some operators. Lawmakers said findings from those investigations placed the rate as high as 90%, although the figure does not represent every kiosk or transaction in the United States.

CoinATMRadar data showed that Hawaii had 57 cryptocurrency ATMs and kiosks operating across four main islands as of Aug. 12. Operators will need to disable the affected deposit function or stop offering machines that accept dollars for crypto before the October deadline.

FBI data put Hawaii kiosk losses at $3.85 million

The FBI’s Internet Crime Complaint Center reported in May that Hawaii residents filed 92 complaints involving cryptocurrency kiosks in 2025, producing about $3.85 million in adjusted losses.

Nationally, IC3 received 13,460 kiosk-related complaints involving $388.98 million in adjusted losses during the same year. Complaint numbers increased by 23% from 2024, while reported losses rose by 58%.

More than half of the 2025 complaints came from people older than 50, with their reported losses exceeding $302 million, according to the bureau. The age data support Hawaii lawmakers’ finding that scammers often target older residents with urgent payment demands and impersonation schemes.

IC3 cautioned that its state totals cover complaints in which a cryptocurrency kiosk appeared somewhere in the fraud. A case may also involve bank transfers, payment apps, or other transaction methods, meaning the full loss listed in a complaint cannot always be attributed only to the kiosk.

Separate figures from the FBI’s 2025 annual report showed that Americans submitted 826 cryptocurrency-related complaints from Hawaii, with losses of approximately $80 million. Unlike the kiosk table, the annual state figure covers several forms of crypto-enabled crime and should not be treated as a measure of ATM fraud alone.

For U.S. consumers, the bureau advises against sending cryptocurrency to anyone known only through phone calls or online messages. It also tells users not to scan a QR code supplied by a stranger or provide funds to callers claiming to represent a government agency, bank, or company without independently verifying the request.

State crypto ATM rules have split between bans and limits

Hawaii has chosen a narrower transaction ban than Indiana, Tennessee, and Minnesota, where state laws prohibit crypto kiosk operations rather than only cash-to-crypto deposits.

Minnesota’s statewide prohibition took effect on Aug. 1 after state authorities recorded 134 complaints and nearly $1 million in losses over three years, as crypto.news reported earlier this month. Existing machines had to stop processing transactions, while operators have until Dec. 31 to remove kiosks accessible to the public.

Tennessee began enforcing its own prohibition on July 1. Georgia took a different route on the same date by retaining the machines under transaction caps, customer warnings, and refund duties for some fraud victims, according to earlier state coverage.

Indiana’s ban had already entered into force in March. Delaware and New Jersey lawmakers have also advanced proposals to prohibit crypto ATMs, though neither proposal had become law as of August.

Other states permit the machines but require licensing, warning screens, receipts, holding periods, daily limits or refunds in defined fraud cases. A crypto.news state rule review published Aug. 3 found that U.S. kiosk oversight ranged from complete prohibitions to states without a dedicated regulatory system.

At the federal level, crypto kiosk operators that qualify as money services businesses must register with the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network and comply with Bank Secrecy Act duties. According to FinCEN, those obligations include an anti-money laundering program, transaction records, suspicious activity reports, and sanctions controls, but federal registration does not prevent states from imposing stricter operating rules.

Enforcement begins with each prohibited transaction

Hawaii placed the new provision in Chapter 481B of its Revised Statutes, which governs unfair and deceptive business practices. The law classifies every cash-to-crypto transaction conducted in breach of the restriction as its own offense, rather than treating continued operation as a single violation.

The final version removed the need for a complete shutdown when a machine can support permitted services. Operators may retain crypto-to-cash withdrawals and exchanges between digital assets, provided they do not accept U.S. currency from customers purchasing crypto after Oct. 1.

Cointelegraph is committed to providing independent, high-quality journalism across the crypto, blockchain, AI, and fintech industries.

All news, reviews, and analyses are produced with full journalistic independence and integrity. For more details on our standards and processes, please read our Editorial Policy.