Connect with us

Finance

The explosion of online sports betting is taking a toll on how people invest

Published

on

Algerina Perna | Baltimore Sun | MCT | Getty Images

The explosion of online sports betting is taking a toll on personal finances, particularly among those who are financially distressed.

That’s the conclusion of a recent paper, “Gambling Away Stability: Sports Betting’s Impact on Vulnerable Households.” The authors found that sports betting has exploded since the Supreme Court overturned a federal law prohibiting it in 2018. Since then, 38 states have legalized it and it has become a growth industry, generating more than $120 billion in total bets and $11 billion in revenue in 2023 alone.

That has put considerable sums into state coffers, but it has come at a notable personal expense to gamblers and their families. Those who participate tend to invest less and have higher debt levels.

“Our results show that not only does sports betting lead to increased betting activity, but it also leads to higher credit card balances, less available credit, a reduction in net investments, and an increase in lottery play,” the authors concluded.

The authors noted these negative effects were particularly noticeable among “financially constrained households.” That term was not defined, but the implication is that this group typically has lower savings, lower cash levels to cover expenses, higher debt levels and lower net worth.

Investing takes a hit

The authors used a quarterly panel of 230,171 households in states that have legalized gambling. About 7.7% of the households made online sports bets, with a household average of $1,100 a year.

Not surprisingly, people who gamble on sports have less money to invest, particularly in the stock market. The authors found a large decrease in net deposits to traditional brokerage accounts. “Two to three years after betting becomes legal, there is a noticeable drop in net investment relative to states where betting is not yet legal,” the report said.

The authors estimate that legalization reduces net investments by bettors by nearly 14%, and that every dollar spent on sports betting reduces net investment by $2.13.

More debt, overdrawn bank accounts

But the implications are much broader.

“The increase in betting and consumption drives an increase in financial instability in terms of decreased credit availability, increased credit card debt, and a higher incidence rate of overdrawing bank accounts,” the authors said.

This is particularly true for financially constrained households. The higher credit card debt indicates that these households are not just shifting funds from one type of entertainment to another. (For example, shifting money from betting on lotteries to betting on sports.) Instead, they are “becoming more indebted to fund an addictive losing proposition.”

Again, lower-income households suffer disproportionately; the bottom one-third of households by income had the largest increase in spending on sports gambling relative to income.

Bettors vs. non-bettors

In a pickle

The authors note the quandary for policymakers. By continuing to legalize and expand activities like sports gambling — where the vast majority lose money — the government is sending conflicting signals.

On the one hand, the government attitude is: These are adults, they have a right to spend their money any way they want to. And we need the money.

But governments have other priorities they are promoting, including encouraging saving money for retirement, that are clearly in conflict with promoting gambling.

“As legalized sports betting gains traction, it potentially undermines government efforts aimed at promoting savings through tax incentives and financial literacy programs,” the authors concluded.

“Policymakers should consider how the allure of betting might divert funds from savings and investment accounts, particularly for constrained households, which can affect household financial stability and long-term wealth accumulation.”

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO

Continue Reading

Finance

Stocks making the biggest moves midday: WOOF, TSLA, CRCL, LULU

Published

on

Continue Reading

Finance

Swiss government proposes tough new capital rules in major blow to UBS

Published

on

A sign in German that reads “part of the UBS group” in Basel on May 5, 2025.

Fabrice Coffrini | AFP | Getty Images

The Swiss government on Friday proposed strict new capital rules that would require banking giant UBS to hold an additional $26 billion in core capital, following its 2023 takeover of stricken rival Credit Suisse.

The measures would also mean that UBS will need to fully capitalize its foreign units and carry out fewer share buybacks.

“The rise in the going-concern requirement needs to be met with up to USD 26 billion of CET1 capital, to allow the AT1 bond holdings to be reduced by around USD 8 billion,” the government said in a Friday statement, referring to UBS’ holding of Additional Tier 1 (AT1) bonds.

The Swiss National Bank said it supported the measures from the government as they will “significantly strengthen” UBS’ resilience.

“As well as reducing the likelihood of a large systemically important bank such as UBS getting into financial distress, this measure also increases a bank’s room for manoeuvre to stabilise itself in a crisis through its own efforts. This makes it less likely that UBS has to be bailed out by the government in the event of a crisis,” SNB said in a Friday statement.

‘Too big to fail’

UBS has been battling the specter of tighter capital rules since acquiring the country’s second-largest bank at a cut-price following years of strategic errors, mismanagement and scandals at Credit Suisse.

The shock demise of the banking giant also brought Swiss financial regulator FINMA under fire for its perceived scarce supervision of the bank and the ultimate timing of its intervention.

Swiss regulators argue that UBS must have stronger capital requirements to safeguard the national economy and financial system, given the bank’s balance topped $1.7 trillion in 2023, roughly double the projected Swiss economic output of last year. UBS insists it is not “too big to fail” and that the additional capital requirements — set to drain its cash liquidity — will impact the bank’s competitiveness.

At the heart of the standoff are pressing concerns over UBS’ ability to buffer any prospective losses at its foreign units, where it has, until now, had the duty to back 60% of capital with capital at the parent bank.

Higher capital requirements can whittle down a bank’s balance sheet and credit supply by bolstering a lender’s funding costs and choking off their willingness to lend — as well as waning their appetite for risk. For shareholders, of note will be the potential impact on discretionary funds available for distribution, including dividends, share buybacks and bonus payments.

“While winding down Credit Suisse’s legacy businesses should free up capital and reduce costs for UBS, much of these gains could be absorbed by stricter regulatory demands,” Johann Scholtz, senior equity analyst at Morningstar, said in a note preceding the FINMA announcement. 

“Such measures may place UBS’s capital requirements well above those faced by rivals in the United States, putting pressure on returns and reducing prospects for narrowing its long-term valuation gap. Even its long-standing premium rating relative to the European banking sector has recently evaporated.”

The prospect of stringent Swiss capital rules and UBS’ extensive U.S. presence through its core global wealth management division comes as White House trade tariffs already weigh on the bank’s fortunes. In a dramatic twist, the bank lost its crown as continental Europe’s most valuable lender by market capitalization to Spanish giant Santander in mid-April.

Continue Reading

Finance

TSLA, CRCL, AVGO, LULU and more

Published

on

Continue Reading

Trending