An Arsenal win, over 2.5 goals at Anfield and a NY Jets victory. Three selections, one small stake and a payout worth checking your phone for.

Parlays (accumulators) are familiar territory for soccer bettors. For prediction markets, however, putting those selections together raises a question that a conventional sportsbook answers almost automatically: who takes the other side?

The answer is becoming more interesting.

America’s prediction markets are already offering parlays

The idea that prediction markets cannot offer parlays is out of date.

Kalshi’s “Combos” allow customers to combine outcomes into one position. Pricing uses a request-for-quote system: a customer requests a combination, and other participants can respond with a price.

There is a catch. Kalshi explicitly states that fills are not guaranteed. If nobody quotes the combination, the customer cannot place it. Longer or more unusual combinations can struggle to attract a willing counterparty.

Polymarket has also moved into combos. Its help centre describes bundled positions, while industry reporting confirms a rollout on its separate US platform.

The challenge has therefore shifted. It is no longer simply whether prediction markets can offer parlays, but how consistently they can price and fill them.

Same-game parlays add another complication. A team winning and its striker scoring are connected outcomes. Multiplying their individual probabilities will not necessarily produce a fair combined price.

Betfair takes customers to its Sportsbook

European exchanges have faced their own version of this problem.

Betfair’s current customer guidance says accumulators and bet builders must be placed on its Sportsbook rather than the Exchange.

That gives customers access to multiples, but the bet follows the Sportsbook’s pricing and rules. An attractive Exchange price on a single selection does not automatically carry across to an accumulator.

Betfair’s broader rules still reference Exchange Multiples, so this should not be mistaken for a claim that the company has never offered them. Its current documented customer journey nevertheless points to Sportsbook.

Whether that produces worse value requires an actual payout comparison. The product label alone cannot settle the argument.

Smarkets supplies the counterparty

Smarkets takes a different approach.

Its multiples guide says Smarkets is the counterparty matching these bets. Customers can buy or sell cross-event multiples, but cannot edit the quoted price. That price is based on the underlying odds without being an exact multiplication of them.

Smarkets also identifies Hanson Applied Sciences as a group liquidity provider. However, its public documentation does not establish that every multiple is specifically handed to Hanson.

The important distinction is that accumulator availability is supported by a designated counterparty, rather than depending solely on another recreational customer wanting the opposite position.

Could Hacksaw open another route?

Hacksaw’s newly announced B2B prediction-market platform introduces an intriguing possibility. Its planned network brings together participation across multiple operators, potentially giving new entrants access to a broader market from launch.

That could create fertile ground for parlay/accumulator development. More connected demand may make it worthwhile for liquidity providers to support a wider range of combinations.

It does not guarantee better prices or unlimited acceptance. Shared participation is not the same as committed capital, and pricing, settlement and regulatory questions remain.

But it opens an interesting question: could a connected operator network make prediction-market accumulators easier to access and more competitive?

The next meaningful advance may be less about adding another selection to the betslip—and more about improving what happens when the customer presses “place bet”.