Share 
Sports events contracts, often described as a type of prediction market, have been making waves lately.
These platforms allow people to wager on outcomes, such as whether the Yankees will win a game, but the debate around how they should be treated legally is heating up.
A new survey paints a clear picture of how voters view these contracts, and the results might surprise some in the industry.
The Public Sees Betting, Not Finance
When asked to classify sports event contracts, a whopping 85% of Americans said these products are a form of gambling, not financial instruments like commodity futures. Only 10% saw them as something closer to Wall Street than Vegas. That leaves little doubt about how the public perceives them.
The example survey respondents were given was simple: pay 50 cents for a contract on whether the New York Yankees will win tonight’s game. If they win, you get $1 back. If they lose, you’re out 50 cents. Voters overwhelmingly called for gambling.
Calls for State Oversight
Most Americans want these contracts to fall under the same rules as sports betting. Eight in ten voters said prediction markets should be regulated like online sportsbooks. The message is clear—if you’re taking bets on sports, you should be playing by sportsbook rules.
Support is also strong for giving states a say. Nearly 70% of people believe each state should decide whether or not sports prediction contracts can operate there.
That mirrors the patchwork approach already in place for sports betting, where state and tribal regulators handle licensing and oversight.
Platforms Seen as Exploiting Loopholes
The survey also highlighted a sense of frustration. Seventy percent of voters said platforms offering these contracts are exploiting loopholes to act like sportsbooks without being licensed. To the average person, it seems like companies are evading regulations rather than following them.
This matters because consumer trust is tied directly to oversight. If a sportsbook is licensed by a state regulator, players know there are rules in place to protect them. Without that, people are left wondering if they’re playing on a level field.
Licensing Is Non-Negotiable for Most Voters
When asked directly, 84% of respondents said prediction market companies should be licensed as sportsbooks if they want to offer sports-related contracts. Only 16% thought they should be allowed to operate without a sportsbook license.
That’s about as lopsided as polling gets. It shows that the public doesn’t buy the idea that prediction markets belong in the same category as financial instruments. For them, this is betting, plain and simple.
Who Should Be in Charge of Regulation?
The survey asked whether state and tribal regulators or the federal Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) should oversee sports prediction contracts. Two-thirds of respondents chose state and tribal regulators. Just 35% thought the CFTC should take the lead.
That result is consistent with the way Americans already see sports betting.
People are used to states setting the rules, offering licenses, and collecting tax revenue. They aren’t clamoring for a federal body to take over.
Responsible Gambling Still Matters
One of the most interesting findings had nothing to do with licensing. The survey asked how people feel about personal responsibility versus company responsibility when it comes to gambling.
Nearly two-thirds of respondents said operators have a duty to provide tools that help customers gamble responsibly. Only about one-third felt it was entirely up to individuals to manage their habits.
That’s a big signal to both regulators and companies. Even if people view gambling as a personal choice, they still expect protections to be in place. Features like deposit limits, timeouts, and self-exclusion lists aren’t just “nice to have.” For most voters, they’re part of the deal.
Limited Appetite for Federal Regulation
While the public is clear about licensing and oversight, there isn’t a huge push for federal regulation of sports betting in general. The survey revealed that people are more comfortable keeping things at the state level.
That aligns with the past few years of sports betting expansion. States have moved at their own pace, with some jumping in quickly and others remaining on the sidelines.
Sports prediction markets and sports betting appear to fit neatly into the same framework.
What Comes Next for Prediction Markets
Taken together, the survey results suggest that prediction markets offering sports contracts won’t be able to avoid regulation for much longer.
The overwhelming consensus is that they’re gambling, not financial tools. If Americans have their way, companies offering these products will need sportsbook licenses, follow state rules, and offer responsible gambling protections.
The question now is how quickly lawmakers and regulators respond. Platforms that have been skirting around the edges of gambling law may find themselves facing stricter oversight sooner rather than later.
Gambling by Another Name
Sports events contracts might feel like a clever financial product to some, but the public isn’t buying it. To most Americans, betting on the Yankees to win tonight’s game for a shot at doubling your money is no different than placing a wager on a sportsbook app.
With 85% of voters labeling these contracts as gambling, the writing is on the wall. States are likely to step in, regulators will set the rules, and companies will have to adjust.
The only real mystery left is whether platforms will embrace regulation or fight it until they have no choice.
