Key Findings
Contents
- An Ipsos survey of 2,363 American adults reveals that 61% classify prediction markets as gambling rather than legitimate investing (8%)
- Only 9% express confidence in prediction markets’ ability to stop insider trading and unfair profiting
- Among Americans familiar with these platforms, 91% characterize event contracts as carrying significant financial risk
- A mere 4% of survey respondents believe prediction markets contribute positively to society
- Men between ages 18-24 demonstrate significantly higher participation rates in prediction and gambling platforms compared to broader demographics
Most Americans classify prediction markets as gambling operations rather than legitimate investment vehicles, new polling data from the American Institute for Boys and Men reveals.
The comprehensive Ipsos poll, commissioned by AIBM, surveyed 2,363 adults representing a national cross-section. Researchers additionally surveyed 447 men ages 18-24 to capture insights from this demographic.
The findings paint a clear picture: approximately 61% of participants categorize prediction markets as gambling activities. A modest 8% consider them investment opportunities.
AIBM initiated this research to examine where prediction markets sit within America’s expanding gambling ecosystem. The institute sought concrete evidence regarding public perceptions of these emerging platforms.
Public Skepticism Runs Deep on Fraud Prevention
The survey uncovered profound distrust regarding anti-corruption measures across financial platforms. A minimal 9% of total participants expressed confidence that prediction markets adequately prevent individuals with insider knowledge from exploiting their information advantage.
Among active prediction market users, confidence climbed to 27%. However, even within this group, 70% remained uncertain about the effectiveness of insider trading prevention mechanisms.
Online sports betting platforms achieved slightly better results with 13% confidence ratings. Traditional stock markets topped the list at 30%—still surprisingly low by AIBM’s assessment.
Jonathan Cohen, AIBM’s policy lead, explained that stock market inclusion provided a reference point for comparison. The consistently low confidence figures indicate users may have resigned themselves to accepting insider activity as inevitable.
General public awareness of prediction markets remains limited. However, among those familiar with these platforms, 91% view event contracts as financially hazardous. This perception holds at 88% among young male participants.
Jessica Wellman, a former gambling industry journalist now advocating for responsible gambling practices, highlighted the disconnect between industry marketing narratives and actual public understanding.
Younger Male Demographics Drive Platform Participation
While overall prediction market adoption remains modest, usage clusters heavily among younger male demographics. Within the past six months, 26% of men ages 18-24 reported engaging with sports betting, daily fantasy sports, prediction markets, or similar gambling platforms.
This contrasts sharply with 14% participation across the general population during the same timeframe.
Few Americans perceive societal benefits from prediction markets. Just 4% of all survey participants view them favorably for society. Among young men specifically, this figure reaches 7%.
Three percent of respondents indicated that gambling broadly and online sports betting specifically benefit society.
Regarding regulatory preferences, most Americans favor oversight: 59% support regulating prediction markets alongside gambling operations, while 52% prefer classification with investment products. Approximately 66% oppose leaving these platforms completely unregulated. Roughly 25% endorse prohibition.
Cohen noted significant data gaps remain regarding actual platform users and their motivations. The overlap between prediction market participants, sports betting customers, and offshore gambling users requires further investigation.
AIBM concluded its report by identifying critical questions for subsequent research. Priority areas include user demographics, potential harms, and whether prediction markets function as gateway activities into problematic gambling patterns among young men.
The institute emphasized that advocates, media professionals, and policymakers currently have an opportunity to influence public discourse and establish regulatory structures before widespread adoption occurs. Cohen stressed that the dominant narrative surrounding prediction markets remains largely unformed.
