Five years since legalization, sports betting has exploded in Arizona

It’s been roughly 58 months since a few hundred sports betting hopefuls joined then-Gov. Doug Ducey and a cadre of gaming executives outside the ironclad gates of Chase Field. That day in 2021, those Arizona dignitaries gathered downtown to officially open the virtual doors to the state’s newest gaming activity: mobile and retail sports betting. 

The road to that day began way back in 2018, when the Supreme Court overruled the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act of 1992. That decision allowed states outside of Nevada to offer legalized sports betting, which had been outlawed by Congress. In the immediate aftermath of that ruling, New Jersey, Delaware, Mississippi, and Pennsylvania legalized sports wagering, though only New Jersey and Pennsylvania allowed mobile wagering. Three years later, Arizona entered the fray.

In the five years since then, the Grand Canyon State has taken in north of $34.6 billion in wagers, good for the sixth-highest total nationally, behind New York, New Jersey, Illinois, Nevada and Pennsylvania. Sports betting in Arizona has also generated $1.858 billion in taxable revenue — that’s total wagers minus payouts and free bets — and $185.8 million in tax dollars.

Those numbers put Arizona 10th nationally in revenue and 16th in tax dollars generated, thanks to its 10% tax rate, which is well below that of most states that bring in more sports betting revenue.

In Arizona, sports betting has simply become a fact of life. Commercials for FanDuel, BetMGM and other sportsbook apps dominate game broadcasts, as do promotions for in-game betting. Casual discussion about sports revolves just as much around who has money down on what as it does around coaches, players and strategy.

Is that a good thing or a bad thing? Nearly five years after Arizona legalized sports betting across the state, that depends on who you ask.

As of April, Arizona posted higher monthly handles — that is, the dollar amount for total wagers placed — across the previous 18 consecutive months than the Silver State. Arizona also has had larger gross gaming revenue totals for 19 months in a row.

Over those 18 months, Arizona’s sports betting market has taken in just under $9.9 billion in handle, compared with roughly $8.5 billion in Nevada. The Grand Canyon State’s revenue during that stretch (roughly $942.7 million) is 44% bigger than Nevada’s roughly $654.8 million in revenue.

Arizona has a bit of an advantage over its neighbor to the northwest, despite Nevada’s longtime association with betting. In Arizona, bettors can download an app and, after a brief registration process, place a wager. Nevada restricts mobile betting, requiring in-person sports betting signups.

“I think it just speaks to the acceptance and growth in Arizona of mobile sports betting,” said Arizona Department of Gaming Director Jackie Johnson in an interview with Phoenix New Times. “Obviously, that was a huge change in 2021, because prior to that, really the only legal gaming option in Arizona was at one of the state’s brick-and-mortar casinos.”

The ability to bet from one’s couch is a big reason — if not the biggest reason — why Arizona’s betting market has taken off. “You have one of the top betting markets in the country,” said longtime sports betting industry journalist Chris Altruda. “You’ve proven to be a superior presence because your mobile game is strong.”

But Arizona’s ability to stay ahead of Nevada largely depends on whether or when Nevada decides to make it easier to place mobile bets.

“If there was ever a point where Nevada decided one day to remove the in-person registration requirement, their numbers would go up, and it would be a lot closer during football season,” Altruda said. “But I think we’re almost at that point now where Arizona, regardless of time of year, because your mobile game is so strong, that you’re going to outperform Nevada.” 

Economist and Arizona State University associate professor Daniel McIntosh views Arizona’s wagering market as having reached maturity, which is an industry term for a stable marketplace. 

He noted that sportsbooks’ hold, or the percentage left over for operators after paying out winnings, has increased in Arizona and in other states. That’s thanks to bettors’ appetite for high-risk wagers. Sportsbooks still rely on the sports calendar to drive business, but they’ve also become more efficient at turning that sports betting interest into money.

“Sportsbooks have gotten better at marketing multi-leg ‘same-game parlays,’” McIntosh said. “Consumers love the high-payout fantasy of a $5 bet winning $500, but mathematically, those bets heavily favor the house and are driving these expanded margins.”

That may seem like a red flag for some — bettors are risking their money on wagers that are less likely to pay out — but that’s not how former ADG director Ted Vogt sees it. Vogt, who led the agency under Ducey, views those prop bets (like wagering on a pitcher’s number of strikeouts in a game or a batter’s likelihood of hitting a home run) and multi-leg parlays (betting on multiple games or outcomes on one ticket) as an indicator of Arizona’s place in the sporting ecosystem.

“We’ve had a pretty strong track record of hosting these major sporting events that come to Arizona that really drive up interest,” Vogt said. “And we have people come from out of the state, which drives up the handle. It’s really kind of a mix of all those.”

Lingering concerns

The prevalence of mobile gaming may have helped Arizona’s bottom line, but it’s also dramatically reduced barriers to an activity that has the potential to send people into financial freefall. The easier betting becomes, the easier it becomes to go bankrupt, too.

That’s a concern for Vogt, whose feelings about Arizona wagering run the gamut from outright pride to trepidation, particularly about the explosion of mobile wagering both here and across America. He gives Johnson and her team props for their investment in responsible gaming and self-exclusion programs. In 2025, ADG spent roughly $1.5 million on problem gambling treatment, with 1,013 people entered into the program, according to its annual report. Since 2021, a total of 2,348 people have self-excluded — that is, put themselves on a list that bans them from entering a casino or from placing a wager online — though that number includes people who self-excluded only from casino gambling.

It’s good that those programs are robust, Vogt said. But he also thinks Arizonans’ overwhelming preference for betting on their phones rather than in a casino or a glorified sports bar is a red flag for the future. 

“I think there needs to be a lot of policy discussion about (mobile sports betting),” Vogt told New Times. “Because you’re on an app, you don’t necessarily feel that the money’s leaving and we could see people get into some real trouble with that.”

Another concern doesn’t involve Arizona’s licensed sportsbooks at all, but instead a newly popular form of betting that the state doesn’t and maybe can’t regulate: prediction markets. Every person interviewed for this story highlighted those markets — which allow patrons to essentially bet on real-world events, in the sports world and beyond — as a growing concern.

In recent months, prediction market platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket have both gone mainstream and come under fire for failing to crack down on insider trading risks, particularly involving the U.S. government’s war with Iran and other matters of national security. In March, Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes hit Kalshi with a slew of illegal gambling operation and election wagering charges, alleging the prediction market illegally took bets on topics ranging from sports outcomes to odds on the SAVE Act becoming law.

A federal judge nipped that criminal case in the bud, ruling that Arizona cannot usurp the federal government’s authority to regulate prediction markets. Mayes’ office did not return requests for comment for this story, though she did not mince words about Kalshi when she first announced the charges.

“Kalshi may brand itself as a ‘prediction market,’ but what it’s actually doing is running an illegal gambling operation and taking bets on Arizona elections, both of which violate Arizona law,” Mayes said in a press release. “No company gets to decide for itself which laws to follow.”

Johnson declined to discuss the state’s case against Kalshi, though she is concerned about maintaining a level playing field for sports wagering operators who are licensed and regulated by the state. They pay licensing fees and taxes in order to operate, while prediction market companies like Kalshi and Polymarket do not.

The American Gaming Association has projected that more than $1.1 billion in tax dollars has been lost nationally since prediction markets like Kalshi and Polymarket began offering sports “event contracts,” highlighting the growing gulf between traditional sportsbooks and their newfound competition. 

“It’s definitely been the hot topic for the last couple of years, and something that is very concerning,” Johnson said. “We’re watching to see if that impacts the legal market, and so outside of discussing the litigation, it really is just as the regulator, we’re trying to work with our licensees.”

Vogt is also concerned about prediction markets — “With these prediction markets, where people can bet on anything, and where one person can manipulate it, I just think there should be a lot of concern around that,” he said — but he thinks there’s not much Arizona can do about it. If prediction markets are regulated federally while sports betting is regulated at the state level, it will take an act of Congress to resolve the overlap.

“I think a lot of that is going to be decided by the courts,” Vogt said. “We’re hearing from Congress that these are regulated markets at the federal level. And if that’s ultimately what the courts decide, then it’s going to be up to Congress to put these guardrails on.”

More milestones to hit

Arizona’s sports betting market may be mature and stable, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t milestones left to achieve. Going forward, Altruda sees a future where Arizona sports betting joins the elusive $1 billion handle club.

That benchmark has been reached by only five states: Illinois, Ohio, New Jersey, New York and Ohio. Arizona has gotten close, with its October 2025 handle totaling $967.1 million. Its high-water mark for one-month tax revenue is $87.4 million, set last December.

Altruda believes Arizona’s more likely to collect $1 billion in wagers during a month than $100 million in tax revenue, which has been hit by eight states. “Football continues to drive the market, and if you get a year where the Arizona Cardinals are 10-2 entering Week 13, and you’re leading the NFC West, you’re going to get bandwagon bettor, and that’s where it’ll be.” Then again, the next time the Cardinals will be 10-2 and atop their division is anyone’s guess.

Regardless of where Arizona’s wagering market goes, regulators like Johnson and Vogt believe the Grand Canyon State has lived up to the hype espoused at that grand opening in Downtown Phoenix five years ago. They also think Arizona needs to remain attuned to the potential harms associated with sports betting’s growth.

“I think it’s pretty impressive what the state has been able to do — from the negotiations with the tribes, to the legislation — and we’ve seen a lot of interest here,” Vogt said. “But I still think that we need to continue to examine the impacts of sports betting, both in Arizona and throughout the country.”