Prediction markets priced by models, not gut feel.
Prediction markets where the odds move on model output, not just order flow, combining on-chain settlement with AI-driven pricing so markets stay liquid and accurately priced even on questions with thin trading volume. This sits at the intersection of our AI and blockchain work, and we're upfront about which half of a build is proven ground and which is closer to the frontier.
Same vetting bar either way, whether we staff the project or fill the seat. See the rubric
Binary and scalar prediction markets, with resolution rules that hold up under dispute.
Models that move the odds between trades, not just an order book waiting for volume.
Payouts settle on-chain against a defined, auditable resolution source.
Resolution data pulled from sources designed to resist manipulation at settlement.
What we build for prediction platforms.
Binary and scalar-outcome market contracts with resolution rules defined before the market opens, ambiguous resolution is the single biggest source of user disputes, so we treat rule-writing as engineering, not an afterthought.
Models that estimate fair odds and adjust pricing between trades, so a market stays informative even before enough volume arrives to price itself, built with the same evaluation discipline we apply to any production model.
Connecting markets to resolution sources (price feeds, sports data, or custom oracles), with manipulation resistance and dispute windows built in, since resolution is where most prediction platforms actually get exploited.
Winnings settle automatically against the resolved outcome, with contracts audited to the same standard as a trading exchange's, since a resolution bug pays out incorrectly at scale, not just once.
Current tools, not last year's.
Shipped, not slideware.
Real-time dispatch platform
A real-time platform built to route and price 12,000 time-sensitive decisions a day, the closest analogue in our portfolio to a prediction platform's live-pricing demands, though it wasn't a blockchain or prediction-market build.
On camera, in their own words.
Why he brought his development work to Code Elevator.
Scoped fast. Shipped on a real timeline.
Building something adjacent?
Answered before you ask.
No. A DEX prices assets against supply and demand in a pool; a prediction platform prices the probability of an outcome, and needs a resolution mechanism a DEX doesn't. Some on-chain settlement engineering overlaps, but the pricing and dispute logic are a different problem entirely.
It depends on the market category and how much historical data exists. We evaluate every model against held-out data before it prices anything real, and we're direct if a category isn't a good fit for AI-assisted pricing yet.
The resolution rules and dispute window are defined and published before the market opens, not decided after the fact. That's the design principle that prevents most disputes, and the ones that still happen route through the process you defined upfront.
It depends heavily on jurisdiction, the outcome categories offered, and whether real-money settlement is involved. This is a genuinely complex regulatory area that shifts by region, and we strongly recommend legal review of your specific market design before launch, not after.
Yes. Several of our clients run prediction markets alongside a trading exchange or DEX; the settlement and wallet infrastructure share a lot of common ground.
Every way out of this build is already written down.
Code, prompts, models and pipelines: all work-product IP assigns to you by contract from day one, not on final payment.
Nothing is locked to us or to a proprietary platform you can't leave. You get the repository, the documentation, and full access.
Bring us the market design. We'll tell you what's realistic.
We'll be honest about which parts are proven engineering and which parts, the AI pricing especially, need real evaluation before you trust them with money.
We reply within an hour during our working day in India and the UAE.