A new peer-reviewed study from Bournemouth University has found a striking gap between how people perceive the risks of matched betting and what some experience in practice.

Matched betting involves using free bets and other promotions offered by online gambling companies to place bets on different outcomes of the same event, such as a football match. The approach is frequently promoted online as a controlled or even “risk-free” way of making money.

Researchers surveyed 2,112 UK adults who were engaged in matched betting and analysed 2,954 personal accounts of their experiences. Participants were asked whether they considered matched betting to be gambling, what difficulties they had encountered and whether they had experienced financial losses. The research team included Bournemouth University researchers Dr Reece Bush-Evans, Dr Helen England, Dr Elvira Bolat, Dr Emily Arden-Close and Dr Ruijie Wang.

“The contradiction between perceived and experienced risk was striking,” said Dr Bush-Evans. “Many participants described matched betting as risk-free or controllable, yet just over half reported having lost money at some point while matched betting.”

The study, published in International Gambling Studies, found that participants frequently distinguished matched betting from conventional gambling. However, their accounts also described experiences associated with gambling-related harm, including financial losses, mistakes, mental strain and emotional impulses. More than half of those surveyed reported losing money through matched betting.

Participants often attributed those losses to human error rather than risks inherent in matched betting itself. “The losses were commonly attributed to mistakes such as incorrect calculations, misunderstanding promotions or pressing the wrong button rather than to risk inherent in the activity,” Dr Wang explained. “What we found particularly interesting was that losses did not necessarily undermine people’s belief that matched betting was risk-free.”

Some participants also reported chasing wins or losses, using additional personal money to place bets, or moving from matched betting into other forms of gambling. The researchers cautioned that because the study captured participants’ experiences at a single point in time, it cannot establish whether matched betting causes subsequent gambling behaviour. They also noted that people who view matched betting as a financial strategy or side hustle rather than gambling may be less likely to recognise potentially harmful gambling behaviours.

The researchers argue that matched betting deserves greater attention from both gambling researchers and those involved in consumer protection. “Matched betting remains surprisingly under-researched despite its visibility online,” Dr Bush-Evans said. The team called for further research that follows matched bettors over time and examines how the practice is promoted through social media, online communities and affiliate marketing.

More information: Reece Bush-Evans et al, “There is no risk, so long as you follow the rules”: perceptions of risk and illusion of control in matched betting, International Gambling Studies. DOI: 10.1080/14459795.2026.2708667

Journal information: International Gambling Studies Provided by Bournemouth University