UK Gambling Commission Data Analysis Highlights Role of Illegal Operators in Licensed Gambling Landscape

Researchers at the UK Gambling Commission examined anonymised open banking transaction records spanning July 2018 through July 2026 and collected from roughly 38,000 panel members through YouGov, and the resulting proof-of-concept study produced several clear patterns about how illegal gambling interacts with the licensed sector in Britain. The analysis identified 122 individuals who made repeated payments to illegal operators, and among those participants 91 percent also placed wagers with licensed companies while showing no substantial drop in licensed transaction volumes after their first detected illegal payment. Problem gambling prevalence measured by a PGSI score of eight or higher reached 45 percent within the illegal payment group compared with six percent among licensed non-lottery gamblers in the same sample.

Methodology and Scope of the Open Banking Review

The study drew on transaction data that participants had already shared through open banking connections, and the Gambling Commission applied detection algorithms to flag payments directed at known illegal gambling sites. Observers note that the panel size of approximately 38,000 individuals allowed researchers to track behaviour across an eight-year window ending in July 2026, which captured activity both before and after several regulatory changes. Data scientists processed the records to isolate repeated illegal payments rather than one-off transactions, and this filtering step narrowed the focus to the 122 individuals whose patterns formed the core of the subsequent comparisons.

Key Patterns in Licensed and Illegal Gambling Overlap

Among the 122 individuals who showed repeated illegal activity, 91 percent continued to use licensed operators at rates that remained statistically stable after their initial illegal payment, and this finding suggests that illegal sites largely supplement rather than displace regulated play. The absence of any marked decline in licensed transaction volumes after the first illegal payment further supports the supplementation interpretation, because participants maintained existing spending patterns with authorised companies while adding new outlays to unlicensed ones. Those who studied the figures point out that the overlap rate of 91 percent held steady across the full observation period, which extended into mid-2026 and therefore reflected behaviour under the current regulatory framework.

Problem Gambling Rates Across Participant Groups

Problem gambling prevalence, defined as a PGSI score of eight or higher, stood at 45 percent for the group that made repeated illegal payments, whereas the corresponding rate among licensed non-lottery gamblers in the broader sample reached only six percent. Researchers compared these two cohorts directly within the same dataset, and the gap remained consistent after controlling for age and overall gambling frequency. The elevated rate in the illegal payment group aligns with earlier evidence that individuals experiencing gambling-related harm sometimes seek out unregulated sites when licensed options impose spending limits or self-exclusion measures. Data from the same panel showed that the 122 individuals also exhibited higher overall transaction counts across both licensed and illegal channels, yet the proportion directed to illegal operators stayed below the volume directed to licensed ones in most cases.

Implications for Regulatory Monitoring

The Gambling Commission has published an accompanying blog post that outlines how banking transaction analysis can serve as an additional monitoring tool, and the post describes the current work as a proof-of-concept exercise rather than a definitive prevalence study. Because the panel was drawn from YouGov volunteers who consented to share open banking data, the sample may not fully represent the wider population, yet the internal comparisons between subgroups remain valid within the observed cohort. Regulators can now examine whether similar patterns appear in larger datasets or across different time windows, and future iterations may incorporate additional variables such as deposit velocity or session length to refine detection accuracy.

Conclusion

The analysis of open banking records from July 2018 to July 2026 demonstrates that illegal gambling in Britain tends to coexist with licensed activity rather than replace it, and the 91 percent overlap rate among the 122 individuals with repeated illegal payments provides quantitative support for that conclusion. Problem gambling indicators appear markedly higher in the illegal payment group, yet teh stability of licensed transaction volumes after the first illegal payment indicates that the two markets operate in parallel for most participants. The UK Gambling Commission continues to explore transaction analysis methods, and further applications of the same approach may yield additional insights as data collection extends beyond the current July 2026 endpoint.