Online Sports Betting Statistics Updated November 2026

Human Written & Fact Checked · Updated

100 Maryland Sports Betting Statistics for 2026

If you want to understand Maryland sports betting, start by separating money wagered from people participating. Regulator accounts describe licensed activity; population surveys describe reported behavior. They answer different questions.

This page brings those views together while keeping their dates and denominators visible. Current monthly accounting is paired with explicitly historical survey evidence. The source inventory preserves workbook cells, report tables and known discrepancies for the next refresh.

Headline figures

How much does Maryland sports betting contribute?

Turnover is the wrong shortcut for public revenue. Follow the accounting from stakes to payouts, deductions and the funds that actually receive the proceeds.

How does mobile wagering translate into taxable revenue?

The mobile figures distinguish the amount wagered from the amount operators retain and the amount subject to taxation. All observations below refer to September 2026, and dollar totals follow the regulator's rounded release. Promotional wagering belongs in the accounting discussion because the state separately reports deductible promotions. A high volume of recycled stakes does not imply equivalent household losses or equivalent government receipts. The published hold rate describes the aggregate reporting period, not the odds of a particular customer winning. Use the workbook for operator-level comparisons and retain its channel labels when combining records.

Where does the state contribution go?

The state contribution is distributed across named funds, while customer payouts and retained wagering revenue are different accounting lines. The figures below cover September 2026. Mobile-only contributions should not be compared as if they represent the combined retail and mobile market. The Blueprint entry describes a funding destination instead of the sportsbook industry's overall economic benefit. Likewise, the General Fund entry here is explicitly mobile-only. Neither tells readers how much a particular public program ultimately spent. For a budget analysis, match these receipts to the receiving fund's expenditure records instead of treating a transfer as a completed service.

What has accumulated since the program began?

The regulator also reports cumulative contributions through September 2026. These are historical running totals, not additional revenue earned during the latest month. Each fund's total follows the applicable reporting history, so the figures should not be converted into an average monthly contribution without checking when the relevant receipts started. Expired prizes are also a separate revenue stream from sportsbook tax. Keeping that distinction visible counts when comparing treatment-related funding with education or general-budget transfers. This cumulative view is useful for tracking fiscal scale, while the monthly view is better suited to identifying changes linked to sporting calendars and operator activity.

Which operators and sports account for wagering?

A licensee table and a sports table answer different questions. Preserve the regulator's labels instead of silently translating licensees into consumer brands or assigning every parlay to a single sport.

How much did individual mobile licensees handle?

The September 2026 workbook identifies mobile licensees, including entries named after their licensed partners. These are wagering amounts, not operator profits or unique-customer counts. Names below reproduce that regulatory structure; a consumer-brand ranking would require a separately verified mapping.

Which conventional sport categories appear in the report?

The sport table combines retail and mobile wagering in September 2026. NCAA and professional categories remain separate, and "Pro Football US" means American football. Low activity in an out-of-season category does not establish low annual demand. Settlement timing can also make a short reporting window look unusual. These rows therefore describe the period shown, not a durable popularity ranking. They should be compared with the same categories in other months before drawing a seasonal conclusion.

How should tennis and residual categories be interpreted?

Tennis is a named sport category, while "Other" is a residual reporting category instead of a sport. The soccer and parlay observations appear in the takeaways and are not repeated here. Multi-selection bets can span events or sports, which prevents a simple allocation of the parlay row to the named categories without underlying bet-level data. The figures below refer to combined retail and mobile stakes in September 2026. They should not be used to estimate online-only market size. A useful comparison preserves the original classification and explains how much activity remains outside named sport rows; it does not invent a cleaner taxonomy than the regulator provides.

Who reported sports gambling in Maryland?

The population survey supplies the people missing from transaction reports. Its historical estimates describe reported participation, not verified sportsbook accounts or a forecast of current demand.

How does participation vary by age and gender?

These estimates come from the 2024 statewide survey, published in September 2025. Lifetime participation is explicitly distinguished from past-year participation. For gender, this page follows the report's table where its narrative differs; that inconsistency is recorded in the research inventory.

How does participation vary by income and work status?

The survey reports past-year sports gambling across household-income categories and among full-time workers. These are descriptive associations, not evidence that employment or income causes gambling. Household-income labels refer to the survey's income question, while sports participation refers to its gambling recall period. The highest-income label is preserved as published instead of silently repaired. Readers comparing these groups should account for sampling uncertainty and other differences in their composition. A higher participation estimate says nothing by itself about the typical stake, financial vulnerability or prevalence of gambling-related harm within that group. Those questions require different measures and denominators.

How do online, casino and informal participation differ?

Channel counts because a population can participate in several forms of sports gambling. Adding participation estimates across modes would count some people repeatedly.

What activity sits outside online sportsbook use?

The statewide survey separates informal sports gambling and fantasy formats from casino and online/mobile sports wagering. Every percentage below refers to past-year participation in 2024 among the named adult population. These overlapping activities cannot be added to produce a total market participation rate. Gender estimates for online/mobile participation likewise use all adults in each gender category, more than sports bettors. The distinction explains why this section's online figures differ from the broader sports-gambling estimates above. A survey respondent may participate in several modes, and the questionnaire's categories do not establish how many commercial accounts that person holds.

Which age groups reported online or mobile betting?

Online/mobile participation is a channel-specific measure drawn from the same 2024 survey. The percentages below describe the share of each age group reporting that activity during the past year. They do not describe the age composition of sportsbook customers: that would require weighting the participating groups by their population sizes. The oldest category here is broader than the oldest categories in the general sports-gambling table, so those endpoints should not be directly matched. Updating this profile requires another comparable population survey, not simply a newer monthly revenue release.

How often do sports bettors wager, and how much?

Participation alone hides substantial differences in frequency and typical stake. Conditional survey measures are more informative when their participant base remains explicit.

How regular was online or mobile sports gambling?

These frequency estimates apply only to adults who reported online/mobile sports gambling during the previous year in the 2024 survey. They are not percentages of all Maryland adults. The daily category is reserved for the takeaways; the remaining categories below complete the source's frequency distribution. A typical-frequency answer is not a transaction log and does not identify how many wagers a participant placed on an active day. Nor can it establish how much the participant lost. Comparing activity across modes is useful, but differences may reflect participant selection as well as the convenience of the channel. The survey is descriptive instead of a test of either explanation.

What did casino and online bettors describe as a typical stake?

Typical-stake bands describe a reported wager size among past-year participants in the specified mode. They do not measure monthly spending, cumulative losses or disposable-income shares. A participant who bets frequently at a small stake can have a different financial exposure from someone placing an occasional larger wager. Casino and online bases are kept separate below; people may appear in both. These survey responses are useful for describing reported behavior, but they should not be multiplied by frequency categories to manufacture an annual spending estimate.

What did Maryland adults expect when mobile betting was new?

Historical intentions help explain the questions people faced early in the market. They must remain labeled as expectations instead of being recast as observed behavior.

How did stated intentions differ by age and gender?

  • Adults very likely to bet during the following year: 11%. (Goucher College, May 2023)
  • Adults very unlikely to bet during the following year: 57%. (Goucher College, May 2023)
  • Men, likely to bet during the following year: 25.1%. (Goucher College, May 2023)
  • Women, likely to bet during the following year: 20.5%. (Goucher College, May 2023)
  • Ages 18–34, likely to bet during the following year: 37.1%. (Goucher College, May 2023)
  • Ages 35–55, likely to bet during the following year: 23.2%. (Goucher College, May 2023)
  • Ages 55+, likely to bet during the following year: 11.9%. (Goucher College, May 2023)

Goucher's April 2023 poll asked about the likelihood of placing a sports bet online or at a casino over the following year. Combined "likely" responses and individual intensity categories are labeled separately below. Age bands reproduce the published crosstab, including its overlapping endpoint labels; they have not been reconstructed into new groups. These historical responses are not a current adoption forecast.

How did intentions differ across race and education groups?

  • White adults, likely to bet during the following year: 17.5%. (Goucher College, May 2023)
  • Black adults, likely to bet during the following year: 31.8%. (Goucher College, May 2023)
  • Other racial identity, likely to bet during the following year: 26.6%. (Goucher College, May 2023)
  • Non-college graduates, likely to bet during the following year: 24.8%. (Goucher College, May 2023)
  • College graduates, likely to bet during the following year: 20.0%. (Goucher College, May 2023)

The crosstabs describe self-reported intentions within each named group in April 2023. Each estimate combines the likely and very-likely responses to the same sports-betting question. Subgroup estimates have more uncertainty than the overall poll, and the reported differences should not be treated as established causal effects. "Other" follows the published racial-identity grouping instead of a category defined for this article. Education categories likewise reflect the original questionnaire. The workbook provides underlying weighted percentages, rounded here to a decimal place. None of these measures identifies actual customer acquisition or subsequent wagering, which would require follow-up evidence.

How did intentions vary by party and household income?

  • Democrats, likely to bet during the following year: 23.6%. (Goucher College, May 2023)
  • Republicans, likely to bet during the following year: 25.1%. (Goucher College, May 2023)
  • Unaffiliated voters, likely to bet during the following year: 15.6%. (Goucher College, May 2023)
  • Other party, likely to bet during the following year: 22.6%. (Goucher College, May 2023)
  • Income under $40,000, likely to bet during the following year: 27.4%. (Goucher College, May 2023)
  • Income $40,000–under $75,000, likely to bet during the following year: 23.6%. (Goucher College, May 2023)
  • Income $75,000–under $125,000, likely to bet during the following year: 20.4%. (Goucher College, May 2023)
  • Income $125,000+, likely to bet during the following year: 22.5%. (Goucher College, May 2023)

Party and income crosstabs concern the same future-year sports-betting intention question in April 2023. They are descriptive subgroup estimates, not explanations of voting behavior or household finances. Political categories should not be combined without the original weighting information. These comparisons belong to their historical polling context and should not be substituted for current bettor demographics.

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.