Hey HN — we built AgentStocks because we kept running into the same problem: you can build an incredibly capable AI agent that reasons about prediction markets, does its own research, monitors news in real time — but the moment it wants to actually place a trade, you hit a wall. Exchange accounts, KYC, capital, on-chain settlement… none of it is designed for agents.
So we built the infrastructure layer. You sign up, create your agent in a minute or two, and give it the ability to trade on Polymarket, Kalshi, and other prediction markets. Your agent does its own research — figures out what to trade and when — and we handle the payments and capital rails behind the scenes. We provide the capital so your agent can actually trade, and we make sure everything is submitted securely.
We're focused on prediction markets for now and rolling access out gradually. If you're building agents with Claude, GPT, or similar models and you're interested in having them trade — or if you're already trading these markets manually and want to automate it — we'd genuinely love to talk.
If you have ideas on how to make this better, or if you're working on something in this space, reach out. Would love to have a quick chat with anyone who's serious about building trading agents.
We’ve been experimenting with x402-style payment flows where bots pay and receive USDC programmatically, without trad brokerage accounts or manual KYC loops. It changes the architecture quite a bit since the agent can settle value natively on-chain.
Curious how you’re thinking about long term payment infrastructure. Do you see this staying custodial with provided capital, or moving toward agents managing their own on-chain balances?
Long term, I do think more value will settle natively on-chain. Programmatic payments (x402-style flows, USDC, etc.) make a lot of sense for agents — especially for auditability, automated accounting, and verifiable track records. From a regulatory perspective, though, agents don’t have liability — their creators do — and I don’t see that changing anytime soon. So someone is always responsible, even if settlement is fully on-chain.
Where I’m more skeptical is around trading specifically. On-chain transparency is great for verification, but trading often depends on discretion. If an agent’s wallet, balances, or patterns are easily traceable, you lose strategic privacy — and in thinner markets (like some prediction markets), that can materially affect execution and pricing.
So my current view is: settlement and performance tracking likely move more on-chain over time, but there will still be demand for execution layers that preserve strategy privacy. Happy to be proven wrong — the design space is still evolving.
Definitely makes a lot of sense, especially around execution privacy. Feels like we may end up with on-chain settlement but more abstracted execution layers. Curious to see which side wins in practice :)
You’re right — the “no capital required upfront” phrasing was misleading. That’s our mistake and we’re fixing it.
What we meant is: you don’t have to pre-deposit funds into a dedicated wallet with us. You can keep funds in your existing accounts (Kalshi, Polymarket, etc.), and when a trade is executed, we pull your portion at that time. For users who prefer, we can also custody funds and forward trades from there.
For lending specifically, you do need skin in the game. If we fund part of a trade, you’re funding part of it too. We’re not in the business of collecting trade ideas to copy or front-run — we’re a capital provider, not a prop desk.
Appreciate the pushback — the wording should have been clearer.
1. Structure & incentives – We’re a lending platform, not a trading desk. Our returns come from loan performance, not from directional bets. Front-running users would destroy the core business.
2. Regulatory constraints – As a broker/lending intermediary, we’re required to act as a neutral counterparty facilitator. Trading against or ahead of customers would be illegal and career-ending.
3. Practical reality – Users bring their own research, models, and theses. We don’t have visibility into some secret alpha we could systematically exploit, and even if we did, copying it would nuke trust instantly.
If we ever front-ran even one customer, word would spread and the company would be dead. Our entire business depends on being a neutral capital provider, not a competitor.
Hey HN — we built AgentStocks because we kept running into the same problem: you can build an incredibly capable AI agent that reasons about prediction markets, does its own research, monitors news in real time — but the moment it wants to actually place a trade, you hit a wall. Exchange accounts, KYC, capital, on-chain settlement… none of it is designed for agents.
So we built the infrastructure layer. You sign up, create your agent in a minute or two, and give it the ability to trade on Polymarket, Kalshi, and other prediction markets. Your agent does its own research — figures out what to trade and when — and we handle the payments and capital rails behind the scenes. We provide the capital so your agent can actually trade, and we make sure everything is submitted securely.
We're focused on prediction markets for now and rolling access out gradually. If you're building agents with Claude, GPT, or similar models and you're interested in having them trade — or if you're already trading these markets manually and want to automate it — we'd genuinely love to talk.
Sign up for the waitlist here: https://agentstocks.ai/
If you have ideas on how to make this better, or if you're working on something in this space, reach out. Would love to have a quick chat with anyone who's serious about building trading agents.
We’ve been experimenting with x402-style payment flows where bots pay and receive USDC programmatically, without trad brokerage accounts or manual KYC loops. It changes the architecture quite a bit since the agent can settle value natively on-chain.
Curious how you’re thinking about long term payment infrastructure. Do you see this staying custodial with provided capital, or moving toward agents managing their own on-chain balances?
That’s a great question.
Long term, I do think more value will settle natively on-chain. Programmatic payments (x402-style flows, USDC, etc.) make a lot of sense for agents — especially for auditability, automated accounting, and verifiable track records. From a regulatory perspective, though, agents don’t have liability — their creators do — and I don’t see that changing anytime soon. So someone is always responsible, even if settlement is fully on-chain.
Where I’m more skeptical is around trading specifically. On-chain transparency is great for verification, but trading often depends on discretion. If an agent’s wallet, balances, or patterns are easily traceable, you lose strategic privacy — and in thinner markets (like some prediction markets), that can materially affect execution and pricing.
So my current view is: settlement and performance tracking likely move more on-chain over time, but there will still be demand for execution layers that preserve strategy privacy. Happy to be proven wrong — the design space is still evolving.
Definitely makes a lot of sense, especially around execution privacy. Feels like we may end up with on-chain settlement but more abstracted execution layers. Curious to see which side wins in practice :)
Further down: ...No capital required upfront.
You’re right — the “no capital required upfront” phrasing was misleading. That’s our mistake and we’re fixing it.
What we meant is: you don’t have to pre-deposit funds into a dedicated wallet with us. You can keep funds in your existing accounts (Kalshi, Polymarket, etc.), and when a trade is executed, we pull your portion at that time. For users who prefer, we can also custody funds and forward trades from there.
For lending specifically, you do need skin in the game. If we fund part of a trade, you’re funding part of it too. We’re not in the business of collecting trade ideas to copy or front-run — we’re a capital provider, not a prop desk.
Appreciate the pushback — the wording should have been clearer.
Good luck!
Further down: ...No capital required upfront.
> Your agent does its own research — figures out what to trade and when — and we
... promise not to frontrun you?
Fair question. Three things stop us:
1. Structure & incentives – We’re a lending platform, not a trading desk. Our returns come from loan performance, not from directional bets. Front-running users would destroy the core business.
2. Regulatory constraints – As a broker/lending intermediary, we’re required to act as a neutral counterparty facilitator. Trading against or ahead of customers would be illegal and career-ending.
3. Practical reality – Users bring their own research, models, and theses. We don’t have visibility into some secret alpha we could systematically exploit, and even if we did, copying it would nuke trust instantly.
If we ever front-ran even one customer, word would spread and the company would be dead. Our entire business depends on being a neutral capital provider, not a competitor.