
Angelo Ciaramello closes Rev One Trading citing tech stack costs; prediction-market infrastructure vendors are already expanding as 13% of prop firms enter the space.
Angelo Ciaramello, the founder of The Funded Trader, is closing his futures prop firm Rev One Trading. He plans to redirect his energy toward prediction markets.
Ciaramello announced the closure on August 21. Rev One had already shut down the previous week. The reason was not a lack of traders or weak demand. He said the economics of the technology stack were the problem.
“We built an amazing product alone but did not have a top platform option, which hurt our ability to scale,” Ciaramello wrote. He called it time to “retire from prop firms” and focus on prediction-market products. He did not identify those products, say whether they would be consumer-facing or infrastructure, or provide a launch timetable.
Rev One was Ciaramello's second prop operation, after The Funded Trader, and concentrated on futures. Its model used paid evaluations in simulated accounts. Traders had to meet profit targets without exceeding drawdown rules before becoming eligible for payouts. Rev One's own website said trading occurred in a simulated environment rather than through actual futures transactions on an exchange.
The platform complaint has a specific backdrop. Rev One had been trying to widen its technology choices shortly before closing. Its LinkedIn page said in July that it was adding DeepCharts and ATAS through Volumetrica after traders requested more platform options.
Ciaramello's argument is narrower than saying futures props lack customers. His claim is that without the right front-end and infrastructure, acquisition and trader demand do not necessarily translate into a scalable business.
Technology providers are making the opposite bet. They say infrastructure can make new prop products easier, not harder, to scale.
Trade Tech Solutions now markets prediction-market infrastructure alongside forex, futures, crypto and sports products. It says its systems support more than 500,000 new prop accounts per month. In June, it added Match-Trader Prediction Markets as an integrated product for prop firms, putting event-driven markets inside the same environment used for execution, position monitoring and P&L tracking.
Match-Trade describes its product as white-label infrastructure for brokers, prop firms and financial institutions. It explicitly says it does not itself operate a prediction market or take wagers. Customers using the software are responsible for obtaining whatever authorizations their jurisdictions require.
PropAccount.com has gone further. It added prediction markets as a supported asset class alongside FX, futures, crypto and equities in July, allowing operators to launch event-contract challenges through an existing operational stack.
Ciaramello is not moving toward an empty category. Infrastructure vendors are already building around it.
The often-cited $40 billion figure needs one qualification. It refers to the wider prediction-market industry, not trading generated specifically by prop firms.
KPMG industry analysis put combined Kalshi and Polymarket volume above $40 billion in 2025, up from roughly $9 billion in 2024. Kalshi alone generated $263.5 million in fee revenue on $22.9 billion of volume, the firm said.
Prop operators are showing interest, yet penetration is still far below that headline volume figure. Acuiti survey data cited by industry analysts put 13% of proprietary trading firms already active in prediction markets and another 31% considering them.
That gives Ciaramello an obvious commercial reason to look at the category without proving that every prop business should follow.
There is also an important distinction between a genuine U.S. prediction market and a prop firm that merely builds an evaluation product around event outcomes.
The CFTC says a prediction market offering swaps or futures contracts to the U.S. general public must operate through a registered designated contract market. Event contracts listed on those venues sit inside the Commodity Exchange Act framework and CFTC oversight.
Retail prop challenges can occupy a less settled perimeter because many use simulated accounts rather than accepting customer money for live market trading. Italy's Consob has separately warned consumers about “funded trading” businesses built around paid challenges and simulated accounts. That shows regulators are examining the model even where its classification is not identical to brokerage activity.
Prediction-market software sold to a prop firm does not automatically inherit the regulated status of a CFTC-registered exchange. That will depend on whether traders access real regulated contracts, simulated versions, and how the operator structures the product.
Former Funded Trading Plus co-founder Michael Cogswell has argued against simply adding prediction markets to an existing prop brand. He said he would not have made that choice at his former firm because the potential regulatory cost could outweigh the commercial upside.
The next data point is not whether another technology vendor launches prediction-market software. That is already happening.
It is whether more established prop founders decide that the economics are better outside conventional funded FX and futures challenges.
Ciaramello has made that choice. What he has not yet shown is what he is building next, how it will be regulated, or whether prediction markets offer better margins than the business he just closed.
For now, Rev One is one closure. If other operators start making the same calculation, it becomes a category trend.
Prepared with AlphaScala editorial tooling from the source reporting linked above. Indexable analysis may include a cited Alpha Score value. Publishing checks screen each story before release. Educational coverage, not personalized advice.