The online gaming industry looks incredibly competitive from the outside. Hundreds of gambling websites, sportsbook platforms, and casino brands operate across different regions, each trying to establish a recognizable position in the market.

But here’s an interesting question: how many independent companies actually control these businesses?

A market might contain dozens of gaming brands while a handful of major corporations generate most of its revenue. This situation creates an important distinction between the number of visible competitors and the actual distribution of market power.

That’s why assessing competitive concentration in online gaming markets has become an essential part of industry analysis.

Understanding market concentration helps operators evaluate competitive pressure, investors identify structural risks, and regulators determine whether consumers have sufficient choice.

It also provides valuable insight into how mergers, licensing restrictions, technological advantages, and changing consumer preferences influence competition.

In this article, we’ll explore the main methods for measuring iGaming market concentration, examine examples from regulated jurisdictions, and explain how businesses can interpret competitive data to make more informed strategic decisions.

1. Understanding Competitive Concentration in Online Gaming

What Is Market Concentration?

Market concentration describes how much of an industry’s economic activity is controlled by a relatively small number of companies.

In a highly concentrated market, a few operators account for a significant proportion of revenue. In a fragmented market, business activity is distributed more evenly across many competitors.

For example, imagine an online casino market containing 20 licensed operators.

If three companies generate 75% of total gaming revenue, the market is considerably more concentrated than another jurisdiction where the same revenue is distributed evenly across 20 independent businesses.

The number of licensed companies alone doesn’t reveal this difference.

Why Concentration Matters in iGaming

Online gambling markets operate under specific regulatory conditions that can influence their competitive structure.

Licensing requirements, gaming taxation, technical certification, and consumer protection obligations create expenses that every authorized operator must consider.

Large corporations may benefit from economies of scale because they can distribute technology, compliance, and administrative expenses across several brands or jurisdictions.

Smaller operators might struggle to achieve similar efficiencies.

However, market concentration isn’t automatically evidence of unfair competition. A company may develop a strong position through reliable technology, effective operations, and legitimate consumer preference.

The important question is whether the structure of the market allows meaningful competition to continue.

Market Definition Comes First

Before measuring concentration, analysts need to decide which market they’re actually studying.

Online casino gaming, sports betting, poker, and bingo may have different competitors and commercial characteristics.

Geography matters just as much.

A sportsbook licensed in one US state may not compete legally for customers in another state where it lacks authorization.

Accurate market concentration analysis therefore begins with clear product and jurisdictional boundaries.

2. Measuring Concentration With Market Share and the HHI

Market Share as the Starting Point

Market share measures the proportion of a defined market controlled by an individual business.

In regulated iGaming, analysts frequently calculate shares using gross gaming revenue (GGR) or a comparable regulator-defined revenue measure.

The basic calculation is:

Market Share (%) = Operator Gaming Revenue ÷ Total Market Gaming Revenue × 100

Suppose an operator generates $80 million in annual GGR within a market producing $400 million.

Its market share would be 20%.

This calculation provides a useful starting point, but analysts must ensure that both figures cover the same jurisdiction, product category, and reporting period.

Understanding the Concentration Ratio

The concentration ratio measures the combined market share of the largest companies.

One popular indicator is the four-firm concentration ratio, commonly called CR4.

Imagine a hypothetical online casino market with five independent operators holding the following market shares:

The four largest operators control 90% of the market.

Therefore, CR4 = 90%.

This suggests that market activity is heavily concentrated among the leading businesses.

However, CR4 doesn’t fully describe how revenue is distributed within that leading group.

Calculating the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index

The Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) provides a more detailed measurement.

It squares each company’s percentage market share and adds the results together.

Using the hypothetical market above:

HHI = 40² + 25² + 15² + 10² + 10² = 2,650

The index ranges from values approaching zero in extremely fragmented markets to 10,000 under a monopoly.

Under the US Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission’s 2023 Merger Guidelines, an HHI above 1,800 indicates a highly concentrated market.

These guidelines also identify an increase of more than 100 points as significant when evaluating mergers in a highly concentrated market.

However, these are US merger-analysis thresholds, not universal rules for gambling regulation.

An HHI score provides structural evidence, but it doesn’t independently prove anticompetitive behavior.

3. Why the Number of Gaming Brands Can Be Misleading

Brand Competition Versus Corporate Ownership

One of the biggest challenges in iGaming market analysis involves distinguishing individual brands from their parent companies.

An online gambling group may operate several websites with separate names, marketing strategies, and customer interfaces.

To consumers, these businesses may appear to be independent competitors.

However, their commercial decisions may ultimately be controlled by the same corporate organization.

This distinction becomes especially important when analyzing mergers or multibrand operators.

How Ownership Changes Concentration Calculations

Return to the hypothetical market from the previous section.

Suppose Operator C, with a 15% market share, merges with Operator D, which controls 10%.

Their combined share becomes 25%.

Assuming the market remains otherwise unchanged, the HHI increases from 2,650 to 2,950.

That’s an increase of 300 points.

Although the consumer-facing brands might remain available, corporate-level concentration has increased significantly.

This illustrates why analysts must map ultimate ownership rather than simply counting gaming websites.

Building an Accurate Ownership Database

A practical ownership database should identify the licensed operating entity, its trading brands, parent organization, and any relevant corporate relationships.

In Great Britain, the UK Gambling Commission maintains a public register containing information about licensed businesses and trading names.

Corporate annual reports and regulatory announcements can provide additional information about acquisitions and ownership changes.

Combining these sources improves transparancy when evaluating market structures.

Without ownership mapping, an apparently competitive industry might conceal a much more concentrated corporate landscape.

4. Comparing Concentration Across Regulated Gaming Markets

Great Britain: A Large and Established Industry

Great Britain provides an important example of a mature regulated gambling market.

According to the UK Gambling Commission, the remote casino, betting, and bingo sector generated approximately £8.3 billion in gross gambling yield during the financial year from April 2025 to March 2026.

Online casino gaming contributed approximately £5.7 billion, while remote betting generated around £2.4 billion.

These figures establish the scale of the digital gambling industry.

However, sector-wide revenue doesn’t automatically reveal which companies control the largest shares.

An accurate concentration assessment would require comparable operator-level figures within specific product categories.

Ontario: Many Operators, But How Evenly Distributed?

Ontario offers a different market structure.

Its regulated competitive internet gaming market launched in April 2022 and expanded to 50 active operators by March 31, 2025.

According to iGaming Ontario’s 2024–2025 annual report, the market generated approximately C$2.9 billion in gaming revenue from C$82.7 billion in wagers.

Online casino products accounted for approximately C$2.2 billion of that revenue.

The presence of 50 operators demonstrates substantial participation, but it doesn’t establish how evenly gaming revenue is distributed.

Some operators may control much larger market shares than others.

Analysts would need reliable operator-level data before calculating an accurate market-wide HHI.

Michigan: Concentration Within a State-Based Market

Michigan illustrates why geographic boundaries matter.

The Michigan Gaming Control Board reported approximately US$3.1 billion in internet gaming gross receipts during 2025, alongside US$671.3 million from internet sports betting.

At the end of December 2025, 15 commercial and tribal operators were authorized and active in internet gaming.

Unlike a nationwide market, Michigan operates within a state-level regulatory framework.

This means competitive concentration should be evaluated specifically among authorized participants in Michigan rather than across all US online gaming brands.

The regulator also provides operator-level revenue information that can support more detailed market-share calculations.

Why Direct Comparisons Require Caution

Great Britain, Ontario, and Michigan use different reporting systems and revenue definitions.

Their reporting periods also differ.

Consequently, comparing total revenue or operator counts without adjustments can produce misleading conclusions.

Meaningful international comparisions require consistent product definitions, compatible metrics, and careful attention to regulatory differences.

5. Mergers, Acquisitions, and Corporate Consolidation

Why iGaming Companies Consolidate

Mergers and acquisitions can significantly influence online gaming market concentration.

Businesses may combine to improve operational efficiency, expand their geographical reach, strengthen technology infrastructure, or reduce duplicated expenses.

Large companies may also acquire smaller businesses to obtain established brands, licensed operations, or specialist capabilities.

These transactions can generate commercial benefits.

However, consolidation may also reduce the number of independently controlled competitors.

The Flutter and Stars Group Merger

A notable example is the merger between Flutter Entertainment and The Stars Group.

In March 2020, the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority cleared the transaction after investigating its potential impact on online betting competition.

At the time, Flutter owned brands including Paddy Power and Betfair, while Stars owned Sky Bet.

The authority examined whether the merger could result in less favorable betting odds, weaker promotions, or reduced product innovation.

Ultimately, it concluded that sufficient competitive pressure remained from other operators.

This case demonstrates that large mergers don’t automatically eliminate meaningful competition.

Regulators must consider the actual competitive environment rather than looking exclusively at company size.

Measuring the Effects of Consolidation

Analysts should calculate concentration both before and after a proposed transaction.

This involves identifying each merging company’s relevant market share and recalculating the HHI.

However, structural changes are only one part of the analysis.

Researchers should also examine entry barriers, consumer switching behavior, competitive closeness, and whether other operators can constrain the combined business.

A merger in a highly concentrated market may raise different concerns from an acquisition in a fragmented industry.

6. Technology and Market Entry Barriers as Concentration Drivers

Economies of Scale Favor Established Businesses

Operating a regulated online gambling platform requires considerable infrastructure.

Companies may need payment processing systems, cybersecurity controls, regulatory reporting capabilities, identity verification, and responsible gambling technology.

These expenses can create advantages for businesses operating at a larger scale.

An established company may distribute infrastructure costs across multiple jurisdictions or gaming products.

Smaller competitors often face higher expenses relative to their revenue.

This difference can influence long-term market concentration.

Supplier Relationships and Platform Dependence

Competition also exists beyond consumer-facing brands.

Gaming content providers, sportsbook technology developers, payment companies, and platform suppliers form an important supporting ecosystem.

If numerous operators depend on a small number of essential service providers, supplier concentration may become strategically important.

For example, reliance on a particular technology platform can create switching costs and operational dependencies.

Analysts should therefore examine both horizontal concentration among gaming operators and vertical relationships involving suppliers.

Licensing Can Limit New Competition

Licensing requirements also influence market accessibility.

Some jurisdictions permit numerous eligible private operators, while others impose restrictions on who may provide certain gaming products.

Compliance costs, financial suitability requirements, and technical certification can further affect entry.

These requirements serve legitimate regulatory purposes, including consumer protection.

Nevertheless, they may also influence the number and characteristics of companies capable of operating sustainably.

A comprehensive concentration study should assess these conditions without assuming that every regulatory barrier is economically unjustified.

7. How Market Concentration Affects Consumers and Competition

Pricing and Product Quality

Competitive markets can encourage businesses to improve technology, customer service, and product reliability.

When consumers have several meaningful alternatives, operators face greater pressure to maintain satisfactory service standards.

Highly concentrated markets may provide fewer independent alternatives.

However, concentration alone doesn’t determine whether service quality improves or deteriorates.

A dominant company can still face competitive pressure from credible existing rivals and potential entrants.

Innovation and Operational Efficiency

Large gaming corporations may possess resources to invest in cybersecurity, payment infrastructure, accessibility, and compliance technology.

These investments can improve operational performance.

However, smaller companies may introduce specialist products or innovative technical approaches that established operators haven’t prioritized.

A healthy competitive environment can benefit from both scale and diversity.

The key is whether innovative businesses can enter, expand, and compete without facing unreasonable restrictions.

Responsible Gambling and Consumer Protection

Competitive pressure should not be measured exclusively through promotional activity or gaming revenue.

In regulated gambling, operators also have obligations relating to safer gambling, transparency, customer verification, and harm prevention.

A concentration analysis should consider whether market structures support effective regulatory oversight and meaningful consumer choice.

Customer switching isn’t necessarily beneficial if it allows individuals to evade responsible gambling protections.

Therefore, researchers should evaluate consumer welfare using broader indicators than promotional generosity or participation growth.

Complaint resolution, regulatory compliance, account security, and effective safeguards are also relevant.

8. Tracking Changes in Online Gaming Concentration Over Time

Concentration Is Not Static

A market that appears fragmented today may become more concentrated over several years.

Mergers, operator exits, new licensing approvals, and changing revenue shares can alter its structure.

For example, an industry might start with numerous similarly sized companies but gradually develop a small group of dominant operators.

Alternatively, new entrants could gain market share and reduce the position of established brands.

This makes longitudinal analysis particularly valuable.

Measuring Market Share Movements

Analysts should examine annual or quarterly changes in operator market shares.

A rising HHI may indicate that revenue is becoming more concentrated, while a declining HHI can suggest a more dispersed market structure.

However, movements should be interpreted alongside changes in the number of licensed companies and total industry revenue.

A temporary increase in one operator’s revenue doesn’t necessarily establish a lasting competitive advantage.

Longer reporting periods often provide a more consistant basis for identifying structural trends.

Understanding Data Limitations

Reliable concentration analysis depends on comparable information.

The UK Gambling Commission publishes market overview data from major online operators, but it warns that this dataset doesn’t cover every operator and shouldn’t be directly compared with its broader industry statistics.

This distinction is important.

A dataset representing only leading businesses may overstate concentration if researchers incorrectly treat it as the entire market.

Missing operator data, different accounting definitions, and undisclosed corporate relationships can introduce additional uncertainty.

Analysts should document these limitations rather than presenting estimated concentration figures as exact measurements.

9. Building a Practical Competitive Concentration Framework

Step 1: Define the Relevant Market

Start by identifying the product category and jurisdiction being analyzed.

Online casinos and sports betting should generally be evaluated seperately unless a broader market definition can be justified through evidence.

Researchers should also distinguish licensed activity from unlicensed market activity.

An analysis limited to regulated operators may be appropriate for understanding competition within the legal market, but it doesn’t necessarily capture every competitive influence affecting consumers.

Step 2: Gather Reliable Operator-Level Data

Collect revenue figures from regulatory reports, corporate disclosures, and other verifiable sources.

Ensure that figures cover the same time period and use compatible accounting definitions.

Next, identify ultimate ownership and group related brands together where corporate-level competition is being analyzed.

Document unavailable information and avoid assigning arbitrary shares to companies with missing data.

Step 3: Calculate CR4 and HHI

Calculate individual market shares before applying concentration metrics.

CR4 provides a quick picture of the largest companies’ combined position.

HHI provides a more detailed view by accounting for the size of every measured competitor.

Where possible, calculate both indicators across multiple periods.

This makes it easier to identify whether concentration is increasing, declining, or remaining relatively stable.

Step 4: Examine Structural and Regulatory Factors

Quantitative indicators should be supported by qualitative research.

Relevant factors include licensing accessibility, mergers, technological dependencies, consumer switching costs, and the ability of smaller businesses to expand.

An operator’s market share might increase because of stronger performance, an acquisition, or the departure of competing businesses.

Each explanation has different implications.

Understanding the causes behind concentration is just as important as measuring its level.

Step 5: Develop a Monitoring Dashboard

A practical competitive dashboard can bring the main indicators together.

It might include operator revenue shares, CR4, HHI, ownership changes, new licences, market exits, and important regulatory developments.

Quarterly monitoring may be suitable for jurisdictions with regular operator-level reporting, while other markets may require annual reviews.

Automated calculations can improve efficiency, but underlying data still needs verification.

The most useful dashboard doesn’t simply rank operators. It explains how competitive conditions are changing and where further investigation may be necessary.

Assessing competitive concentration in online gaming markets helps explain how economic power is distributed across regulated gambling industries.

Market share, CR4, and the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index provide valuable quantitative measurements, while ownership analysis reveals relationships that aren’t always obvious from consumer-facing brands.

Examples from Great Britain, Ontario, and Michigan demonstrate why regulatory boundaries and reliable data matter. The Flutter–Stars merger also highlights the importance of evaluating actual competitive effects rather than assuming every large transaction is harmful.

For operators, investors, policymakers, and researchers, the strongest approach combines accurate financial information, ownership mapping, and continuous market monitoring.

Start by identifying your target jurisdiction, collecting comparable operator-level data, and calculating concentration indicators over time.

A structured analysis can reveal competitive risks, market opportunities, and the forces shaping the industry’s long-term development.