As the popularity of prediction markets continues to grow, a new poll from Morning Consult has found that most Americans believe the event contracts they offer are the same as gambling and worry they could lead to increased harm, especially among young users.
The findings are similar to an earlier poll that found Americans are more likely to view prediction markets as betting than investing.
The survey was commissioned by Gambling Is Not Investing, an anti-prediction market coalition led by former U.S. Rep. Mick Mulvaney, which says its goal is to “stop prediction markets from offering unsafe and unregulated sports event contracts that bypass state and tribal laws.”
According to the poll, 81% of those surveyed said sports betting on prediction markets is gambling, while 77% expressed concern about platforms allowing teens to bet on sports, something they believed could increase gambling-related harm among young adults, compared with sportsbooks that require users to be at least 21 years old.
Another 81% of respondents either strongly or somewhat agreed that prediction markets should be subject to state gaming regulations, including age restrictions, tax structures, and problem gambling requirements.
In the press release announcing the poll results, Mulvaney said:
“This polling confirms that unabated sports gambling on prediction markets is a growing concern across America. Prediction markets are trying to disguise their sports betting products as a financial investment, misleading Americans and dodging consumer safeguards like age requirements. Let’s face it, if it quacks like a duck, it’s sports betting.”
Survey Shows Strong Support for Sports Betting Regulations
According to the topline report, 15,029 adults in the United States were surveyed from March 17-22. The survey found that 73% of respondents believe using terms like “event contracts,” “swaps,” or “futures” to describe sports betting makes it harder to understand the financial risks associated with prediction markets. They said this was especially true for young people.
Of those surveyed, 79% said that prediction markets listing sports event contracts should be required to provide users with the same problem gambling resources as licensed sportsbooks.
Reading through the questions and how they’re framed, one could argue that they’re posed in a way that reflects the priorities of the Gambling Is Not Investing Coalition.
Several of the survey questions directly compare prediction markets with state-regulated sportsbooks and refer to teenagers betting on sports, but don’t specify that users must be 18 years old to use the platforms.
There are also a few questions that use suggestive phrasing; for example, one asks whether using financial terms like “swaps” or “futures” makes it “more difficult” for consumers to recognize risks. When a question is presented that way, it assumes a level of difficulty already exists, rather than using more neutral language.
Capitol Hill Keeps Up Pressure on Prediction Markets
Prediction markets have faced increasing scrutiny on Capitol Hill in recent weeks as lawmakers seek to rein in the event contract exchanges. In the last week alone, lawmakers introduced three separate bills targeting the sector from different angles.
- The PREDICT Act would ban members of Congress, senior federal officials, and other covered personnel from trading on certain prediction market contracts.
- The Public Integrity in Financial Prediction Markets Act of 2026 would bar government officials from using insider information to profit from event contracts.
- The STOP Corrupt Bets Act would ban prediction market contracts tied to elections, war, government actions, and sports.
On March 30, lawmakers also ramped up pressure on the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and the U.S. Office of Government Ethics, sending a letter urging them to crack down on what they described as illegal insider trading in prediction markets by federal employees.
