PredMart > Blog > The 4 Platforms Offering Leverage on Polymarket: A Side-by-Side Breakdown

Comparison · · 6 min read

The 4 Platforms Offering Leverage on Polymarket: A Side-by-Side Breakdown

Leverage on Polymarket has gone from "nobody does this" to four live products in about a year. They look similar from the outside — "trade Polymarket with leverage" — but under the hood they make very different bets about custody, chain, and risk. If you're thinking about using any of them, the differences matter a lot more than the marketing leverage number. Here's a breakdown of all four, what they do well, and what to watch for. (Everything below is based on public, on-chain data as of late May 2026 — verify for yourself before depositing.)

The Core Split: Custodial vs. Non-Custodial

This is the first thing to understand, because three of the four are built one way and one is built the other.

A non-custodial lending model means the positions and collateral stay in smart contracts you control, and the protocol advances USDC against them. You hold your own shares. PredMart is the one built this way.

A custodial (prime broker) model means you hand over USDC margin and the platform's relayer opens and holds positions on your behalf. The platform controls the shares. You're trusting them to execute, manage risk, and pay out correctly. Ultramarkets, Amplifi, and Worm work this way.

Neither is automatically "better," but the trust assumptions are very different, and that's worth being clear-eyed about before depositing.

PredMart

The non-custodial option, and the one built most conservatively around protecting user funds. Rather than depositing margin to a broker, you open positions that you own: the protocol takes your USDC as equity, advances additional USDC from a unified lending pool, buys the shares on Polymarket, and holds them as your collateral in a wallet you control. Up to 5x (a flat 80% LTV, the same at any share price). Live on Polygon.

A few things set it apart from the other three. It's the only one of the four audited by a top-tier security firm — Hashlock, whose client list includes SushiSwap and Gala Games and who have completed 300+ audits securing billions on-chain. Of the other three, two don't appear to have a published audit at all, and the one that does used a smaller, less-established firm. PredMart's contracts are also verified on-chain, it's listed on DeFiLlama, and the docs publicly spell out every risk parameter — oracle pricing, borrow caps, liquidation logic.

Two things also fall out of the non-custodial design that the broker models structurally can't match. First, you hold the actual shares, so you can ride a winning position through to resolution and redeem at $1 — no forced pre-resolution close. Second, because everything is on-chain and auditable, you're not trusting an undisclosed relayer with your funds.

Ultramarkets

The most established of the custodial group. It's a custodial prime broker on Polygon — you deposit USDC margin and they hold and execute leveraged Polymarket positions on your behalf, up to 10x, long or short.

The tradeoffs are significant. Beyond the custodial model itself, the contracts appear to be controlled by a single admin EOA, and the platform force-closes positions before the underlying market resolves to avoid binary gap risk — which means you can't ride a winning position all the way to the $1 payout. Its only published security review appears to be from CDSecurity, a smaller firm, and based on public data there looks to be a gap between self-reported volume and the on-chain LP vault size, so the headline traction numbers don't fully hold up to scrutiny.

Amplifi

The newest of the group. Also a custodial relayer model on Polygon, built on t1 protocol infrastructure, with a stated goal of eventually bridging Polymarket positions and Hyperliquid outcome markets cross-chain. It's PUSD-native — built around Polymarket's new collateral token — and the team is connected to an a16z-backed company (T1 Protocol).

The tradeoffs: it's very early (on-chain TVL appeared to be around $2k as of mid-May 2026), we couldn't find a source-verified canonical lending pool or a published audit, and the cross-chain Hyperliquid piece — the actual thesis — isn't deployed yet. It uses the same single-relayer trust model as Ultramarkets. A stated direction, but largely unproven and, as far as we can tell, unaudited today.

Worm

The most distinctive of the four because it's Solana-native on the user side. You trade with a Phantom/Backpack wallet, and Worm's relayer executes on Polymarket (Polygon) or Hyperliquid behind the scenes — up to 3x. It raised a $4.5M pre-seed and runs two execution backends.

The tradeoffs are where it gets concerning. The leverage product is custodial, the Solana program appears to be closed-source with no published audit we could find, and — most importantly — the EVM relayer that actually holds your Polymarket exposure doesn't appear to be publicly disclosed, so you can't independently verify solvency. Upgrade authority also appears to sit on a single key. Strong funding, but the weakest transparency of the group on the information we could find, and you're trusting a relayer you can't see.

Related