Online Sports Betting Statistics Updated November 2026

Human Written & Fact Checked · Updated

100 Arizona Sports Betting Statistics for 2026

Arizona's betting accounts and its population surveys answer different questions. If you want to understand both the market and the people around it, money wagered cannot substitute for participation, and participation cannot substitute for gambling-related harm.

This page combines the regulator's August market accounts with the adult survey fielded in December 2025 and the latest youth survey. Each observation keeps its channel, population and reporting period. The adult report is dated June 2026; the youth document's August citation identifies its PDF version date, not an independently established first release date.

Headline figures

  • Arizona August 2026 combined wagers: $582,825,646.46. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 combined adjusted receipts subject to privilege fees: $36,200,918.89. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 combined privilege fees: $3,614,997.80. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 mobile wagers: $581,182,659.08. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 Draft Kings/Crown Gaming mobile wagers: $162,212,858.96. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 Fan Duel mobile wagers: $186,392,140.11. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, online/app sports wagering participation: 22%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, moderate/high PGSI classification among sportsbook participants: 44%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, helpline awareness among sportsbook participants: 65%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona 2026 youth survey, all surveyed grades reporting sports betting: 22.2%. (ACJC and ASU, Aug 2026)
  • Arizona 2026 youth survey, all surveyed grades betting through online casino/sportsbook/peer-to-peer apps: 5.5%. (ACJC and ASU, Aug 2026)
  • Arizona 2026 youth survey, all surveyed grades reporting any included gambling: 47.6%. (ACJC and ASU, Aug 2026)

How much does Arizona's regulated market generate?

Turnover is the beginning of the accounting chain, not its conclusion. The regulator's August report separates wagers, payouts, promotional deductions and the receipts used to assess fees.

What does the combined market total measure?

  • Arizona August 2026 combined payouts: $531,755,242.31. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 combined adjusted receipts before promotional deductions: $49,649,029.11. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 combined promotional-credit deduction: $13,448,110.22. (ADG, Oct 2026)

The combined table covers retail, limited event wagering and mobile operations. Adjusted receipts before promotional deductions already account for federal excise tax, so they are not simply interchangeable with an unadjusted stakes-minus-payouts calculation. The headline takeaway figures above belong to this same accounting sequence. The source labels the reporting period August, with a printed date range ending on the thirtieth; this page retains that source limitation instead of silently rewriting it. All figures are operator-reported and unaudited. They may change after review. The remaining entries show how money returned to players and allowable promotional deductions sit between the wager total and the amount subject to privilege fees. None of these entries is the sportsbook industry's net profit.

How does the retail accounting block work?

  • Arizona August 2026 retail wagers: $1,642,987.38. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 retail payouts: $1,386,724.93. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 retail adjusted receipts before promotional deductions: $257,424.33. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 retail promotional-credit deduction: $2,720.00. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 retail adjusted receipts subject to privilege fees: $254,704.33. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 retail privilege fees: $20,376.35. (ADG, Oct 2026)

The retail subtotal uses the same accounting labels as the combined market table. Its amounts concern that channel alone instead of a separate statewide estimate. Promotional deductions and federal excise tax affect the progression from wagers to taxable adjusted receipts. Privilege fees are assessed on positive amounts and can reflect prior-period adjustments, according to the source footnote. These definitions explain why a reader should use the published fee line instead of multiply a rounded headline figure.

How does the mobile accounting block work?

  • Arizona August 2026 mobile payouts: $530,368,517.38. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 mobile adjusted receipts before promotional deductions: $49,391,604.78. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 mobile promotional-credit deduction: $13,445,390.22. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 mobile adjusted receipts subject to privilege fees: $35,946,214.56. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 mobile privilege fees: $3,594,621.45. (ADG, Oct 2026)

Mobile activity is reported separately from retail wagering. The takeaway handle figure and the remaining entries below are parts of the same monthly block. Payouts represent amounts returned to players; they are not marketing expenses. Promotional credits receive a distinct deduction line, and adjusted receipts before and after that deduction answer different questions. The regulator's own labels are preserved so readers can trace the figures directly to the original report without substituting an informal definition of revenue.

Which operators appear in Arizona's mobile accounts?

Operator comparisons need consistent units. The selected rows below show mobile wagers, payouts and adjusted receipts before promotional deductions for the same month.

What do the Bet365 and BetMGM rows show?

  • Arizona August 2026 Bet365 mobile wagers: $42,876,455.18. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 Bet365 mobile payouts: $40,004,211.56. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 Bet365 mobile adjusted receipts before promotional deductions: $2,764,048.67. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 BetMGM mobile wagers: $54,748,163.72. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 BetMGM mobile payouts: $48,981,258.14. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 BetMGM mobile adjusted receipts before promotional deductions: $5,634,559.00. (ADG, Oct 2026)

The regulator lists each operator's mobile activity alongside any retail entries. This selection uses only the mobile columns, so it should not be described as the companies' total Arizona business where a retail operation is also reported. Adjusted receipts before promotional deductions account for federal excise tax. Comparing that measure across operators is more consistent than mixing one company's wagers with another company's fee-bearing receipts. The figures are monthly state activity, not company earnings.

What do Caesars and Desert Diamond report?

  • Arizona August 2026 Caesars (American Wagering) mobile wagers: $30,996,217.97. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 Caesars (American Wagering) mobile payouts: $28,972,454.57. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 Caesars (American Wagering) mobile adjusted receipts before promotional deductions: $1,948,037.89. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 Desert Diamond Mobile mobile wagers: $4,111,782.92. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 Desert Diamond Mobile mobile payouts: $3,836,082.62. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 Desert Diamond Mobile mobile adjusted receipts before promotional deductions: $266,020.42. (ADG, Oct 2026)

These rows illustrate why the reporting channel must remain in the label. Caesars has separate retail entries in the same source table, while the selection here concerns mobile activity. Desert Diamond Mobile is identified using the regulator's own operator name. The observed differences in wagers and payouts do not establish differences in profitability because this extract does not include operating costs or the final effect of promotional deductions. No nationwide market-share claim is inferred.

How do DraftKings, Fanatics and FanDuel appear?

  • Arizona August 2026 Draft Kings/Crown Gaming mobile payouts: $145,829,704.72. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 Draft Kings/Crown Gaming mobile adjusted receipts before promotional deductions: $15,989,169.24. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 Fanatics Sports Book mobile wagers: $70,999,907.58. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 Fanatics Sports Book mobile payouts: $66,145,522.73. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 Fanatics Sports Book mobile adjusted receipts before promotional deductions: $4,679,791.58. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 Fan Duel mobile payouts: $170,099,093.61. (ADG, Oct 2026)
  • Arizona August 2026 Fan Duel mobile adjusted receipts before promotional deductions: $15,836,588.45. (ADG, Oct 2026)

The remaining selected operators use the same mobile measures. DraftKings and FanDuel handle appear in the takeaways, leaving the associated payout and adjusted-receipt entries here. The report's original operator spellings are retained for traceability. These are selected rows instead of a complete league table, and no brand ranking is based on figures from a different month or a different channel. Their national scale cannot be inferred from this state report alone.

Who reports sports wagering in Arizona's adult survey?

Administrative turnover cannot tell you how many people participate. The adult survey supplies that perspective, while its different questions must remain distinct instead of being forced into one participation rate.

How do sportsbook participation and event attendance differ?

  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, sportsbook participation: 21%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, men's sportsbook participation: 28%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, women's sportsbook participation: 13%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, ages 21–29 sportsbook participation: 33%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, ages 60+ sportsbook participation: 7%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, professional/college sporting-event attendance: 30%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, betting on Arizona professional/college teams: 14%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)

The survey's sportsbook question, its attendance question and its question about betting on Arizona teams measure different behaviors. A respondent can attend a game without wagering, or wager without attending. Participation percentages are weighted estimates for the stated adult subgroup, not shares of sportsbook revenue. Age and sex differences describe associations in this survey; they do not identify why an individual chooses to bet or establish that one characteristic causes participation.

How do app use and gambling frequency relate?

  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, physical-location sports wagering participation: 16%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, ages 21–29 online/app sports wagering: 32%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, ages 60+ online/app sports wagering: 8%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, weekly-or-more gambling among online/app sports users: 68%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, weekly-or-more gambling among other respondents: 20%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, weekly-or-more sports wagering among online/app sports users: 43%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, weekly-or-more sports wagering among other respondents: 0.3%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)

Online or app-based sports wagering uses a separate question, so its estimate need not equal the sportsbook-participation question. The frequency comparisons distinguish app users from other respondents. Weekly gambling and weekly sports wagering are different outcomes. These are associations from the survey, not evidence that adopting an app caused a respondent to gamble more frequently. The report's subgroup denominators remain attached to each observation.

What does the survey say about prediction markets?

  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, prediction-market participation: 5%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, men's prediction-market participation: 7%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, women's prediction-market participation: 3%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, ages 21–29 prediction-market participation: 10%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, ages 60+ prediction-market participation: 1%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, prediction-market awareness: 13.7%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)

Prediction-market participation is reported separately from state-regulated sportsbook use. The survey includes platforms covering sporting and non-sporting events, so these estimates are not a count of sports-contract customers alone. Awareness and participation also differ: knowing about a product does not mean using it. The figures describe the survey period and do not establish the current legal position of a particular platform. A separate legal analysis would be needed before making an availability claim.

What does the survey reveal about harm and support awareness?

A screening score is not a clinical diagnosis. Keeping risk classifications separate from awareness measures prevents a concerning association from becoming an unsupported claim about every bettor.

How are respondents distributed across PGSI categories?

  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, minimum PGSI risk classification: 64.6%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, low PGSI risk classification: 17.1%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, moderate PGSI risk classification: 9.9%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, high PGSI risk classification: 8.4%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, moderate/high PGSI classification among weekly gamblers: 39%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, moderate/high PGSI classification among monthly-or-less gamblers: 7%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)

The Problem Gambling Severity Index, or PGSI, groups respondents by reported behaviors and consequences. Its minimum-risk category includes people who did not gamble, so it should not be described as a category containing only active gamblers. The frequency comparison concerns moderate-to-high classifications within each stated group. These figures are useful for identifying where further research and support may be needed, but screening results do not establish that each respondent has a diagnosed gambling disorder.

Which activities are linked to higher screening risk?

  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, moderate/high PGSI classification among prediction-market participants: 69%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, moderate/high PGSI classification among esports bettors: 66%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, moderate/high PGSI classification among other-online-gambling participants: 53%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, awareness of sportsbook voluntary self-exclusion: 15%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, awareness of casino voluntary self-exclusion: 19%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)

Activity-specific screening rates use participants in the named activity as their denominator. The sportsbook observation is showed in the takeaways, while the remaining comparisons show related parts of the survey. A person can take part in several activities, so these categories cannot be added as though they were mutually exclusive groups. Awareness of voluntary self-exclusion is a separate question and is not evidence that respondents enrolled, received treatment or stopped gambling.

Who recognizes the state's problem-gambling helpline?

  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, awareness of the state problem-gambling helpline: 48%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, men's awareness of the state problem-gambling helpline: 52%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, women's awareness of the state problem-gambling helpline: 45%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, helpline awareness among non-sportsbook participants: 44%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)
  • Arizona FY2025–26 adult survey, helpline awareness among professional/college event attendees: 57%. (PGS and NORC, Jun 2026)

Awareness measures whether respondents had seen or heard of the service, not whether they called it or received care. The sportsbook-participant estimate in the takeaways belongs with these subgroup comparisons. Differences may reflect exposure to outreach, personal experience or other factors; the survey cannot isolate the effect of a campaign from these observations alone. The results also distinguish attending a sporting event from participating in sports wagering, so those groups should not be treated as interchangeable.

What do Arizona students report about sports and online betting?

Youth survey results describe self-reported behavior, not legal access. They include informal betting and must not be interpreted as a count of minors holding regulated sportsbook accounts.

How did reported sports betting change in younger grades?

  • Arizona 2022 youth survey, grade 8 reporting sports betting: 30.6%. (ACJC and ASU, Aug 2026)
  • Arizona 2024 youth survey, grade 8 reporting sports betting: 31%. (ACJC and ASU, Aug 2026)
  • Arizona 2026 youth survey, grade 8 reporting sports betting: 26.4%. (ACJC and ASU, Aug 2026)
  • Arizona 2022 youth survey, grade 10 reporting sports betting: 22.4%. (ACJC and ASU, Aug 2026)
  • Arizona 2024 youth survey, grade 10 reporting sports betting: 22.7%. (ACJC and ASU, Aug 2026)
  • Arizona 2026 youth survey, grade 10 reporting sports betting: 19.9%. (ACJC and ASU, Aug 2026)

The repeated sports-betting question permits a descriptive comparison across survey years for each grade. The measure is whether a student reported betting on sports at least once during the preceding year. It does not specify a licensed platform, an account or a minimum stake. Different survey waves contain different students, so the series does not follow the same children as they age. Grade-level percentages should not be read as a longitudinal change in individual behavior.

What do older students and the overall sample report?

  • Arizona 2022 youth survey, grade 12 reporting sports betting: 17.9%. (ACJC and ASU, Aug 2026)
  • Arizona 2024 youth survey, grade 12 reporting sports betting: 18.6%. (ACJC and ASU, Aug 2026)
  • Arizona 2026 youth survey, grade 12 reporting sports betting: 16.7%. (ACJC and ASU, Aug 2026)
  • Arizona 2022 youth survey, all surveyed grades reporting sports betting: 24.9%. (ACJC and ASU, Aug 2026)
  • Arizona 2024 youth survey, all surveyed grades reporting sports betting: 25.4%. (ACJC and ASU, Aug 2026)

The older-grade and overall estimates use the same past-year sports-betting item. The latest overall value is showed above. The all-grades result reflects the combined surveyed grades instead of an unweighted average that readers should reconstruct from the displayed grade percentages. School participation and the composition of each wave matter when interpreting the trend. The figures establish reported behavior within the survey framework, not the size of an illegal commercial betting market.

What does the new online-betting item include?

  • Arizona 2026 youth survey, grade 8 betting through online casino/sportsbook/peer-to-peer apps: 4.5%. (ACJC and ASU, Aug 2026)
  • Arizona 2026 youth survey, grade 10 betting through online casino/sportsbook/peer-to-peer apps: 6.1%. (ACJC and ASU, Aug 2026)
  • Arizona 2026 youth survey, grade 12 betting through online casino/sportsbook/peer-to-peer apps: 6.6%. (ACJC and ASU, Aug 2026)

The new question combines online casinos, sportsbooks and peer-to-peer betting apps or websites. It therefore cannot supply a sports-only estimate, and it should not be compared directly with the broader sports-betting item as though their definitions matched. The latest all-grades estimate appears in the takeaways. Earlier waves did not administer this question, so a missing earlier value is not zero participation. The grade-specific observations below describe the combined item only. They do not reveal which platform was used, whether a student used another person's account, or whether the activity was licensed. Those distinctions would require additional questions. The original table explicitly marks the earlier years as unavailable, preserving that limit on trend analysis.

How does sports betting fit within broader youth gambling?

The broader gambling item provides context without replacing the sports measure. Its definition counts because the report harmonizes earlier waves before presenting a trend.

What is included in the grade-level gambling measure?

  • Arizona 2026 youth survey, grade 8 reporting any included gambling: 53.2%. (ACJC and ASU, Aug 2026)
  • Arizona 2026 youth survey, grade 10 reporting any included gambling: 45.1%. (ACJC and ASU, Aug 2026)
  • Arizona 2026 youth survey, grade 12 reporting any included gambling: 39.5%. (ACJC and ASU, Aug 2026)

The combined measure covers lottery or scratchcard play and betting on games of personal skill, card games or sports. It is not a total of the separate participation percentages: students can report more than one activity. The grade-specific results below use the report's harmonized definition. The online-casino, sportsbook and peer-to-peer question remains a separate item, so its presence in the latest questionnaire does not justify adding its percentage to this combined measure. These distinctions keep the context relevant to sports betting while avoiding a claim that all reported gambling occurred through a sportsbook. The source row is shown above with its original order: grade groups first, followed by the all-grades results, with survey years repeated within each group.

How should the overall historical comparison be read?

  • Arizona 2024 youth survey, all surveyed grades reporting any included gambling: 51.4%. (ACJC and ASU, Aug 2026)
  • Arizona 2022 youth survey, all surveyed grades reporting any included gambling: 53.9%. (ACJC and ASU, Aug 2026)

The report recalculates the earlier combined-gambling observations to exclude dice betting because that item was not administered in the latest wave. This harmonization makes the displayed definition more consistent across years, but it also means these values can differ from an older report that included dice. The latest overall estimate appears in the takeaways; the earlier observations below provide context for that same definition. They should not be compared with an unadjusted historical figure without checking the questionnaire and footnotes. The survey is repeated across school samples instead of following identical students. A descriptive decline therefore does not, by itself, prove that a policy or prevention program caused individual students to stop gambling.

Glossary

Methodology and sources

Every figure on this page comes from the organisation that produced it: regulators, statistics offices, public bodies, research institutes, and companies reporting their own data or surveys. Each one links to the original report or dataset and carries its release date. Survey results keep their population and fieldwork period, and financial figures keep the measure the producer used. Figures from different producers are not added together or ranked against each other. The page is reviewed monthly and updated when a producer releases newer data.