The American Gaming Association, a trade group for the regulated casino and gaming industry, says a new study found gamblers scored higher in financial literacy than non-gamblers. Sports bettors led the groups measured, while prediction-market users expressed confidence in their math skills but performed more like people who did not gamble.

The findings come as courts disagree over whether states can regulate platforms such as Kalshi, which lets users trade contracts tied to sports and other events. In August, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a ruling barring Kalshi from offering sports-betting contracts in Nevada, rejecting the company’s argument that its products fall under federal commodities law rather than state gaming rules.

The AGA filed a brief in October supporting New Jersey’s petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to clarify states’ authority over prediction markets. The Third Circuit had earlier ruled that Kalshi was subject to federal oversight by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, not New Jersey gaming laws. The split among appeals courts has also prompted briefs from the NFL and a coalition of 39 states and Washington, D.C.

Carly Johnson, the AGA’s director of research, said prediction-market users combined sports bettors’ confidence with the tested math performance of non-gamblers. She argued that prediction markets can offer sports-related bets without the responsible-gambling safeguards required of licensed sportsbooks, while marketing products as investments.

The AGA says the regulated gaming industry spends about $472 million annually on responsible-gambling programs and contributes more than $130 million a year in taxes for problem-gambling services. Johnson said prediction markets do not contribute to those services. Those figures and comparisons were presented by the trade group, which has argued that prediction markets compete with regulated gaming businesses and weaken state and tribal authority.

There are signs that some platforms are adding safeguards. Polymarket announced in September that it had launched a Trust & Safety Center, including voluntary self-exclusion, deposit limits and mental-health resources. Kalshi did not respond to a request for comment on the AGA study.

Financial literacy can help consumers assess risk, but it is only one part of protecting players, said Andrea Dassopoulos, a sociologist and research faculty member at UNLV’s International Gaming Institute who studies public health, problem gambling and player protection.

“ You want to combine education with other things — with safer product design, limits and tools,” Dassopoulos said, describing measures with established value for player protection. She cautioned that knowing more about finances does not necessarily change someone’s gambling behavior, and said financial education should not be treated as a solution to gambling harms.

The AGA study found the highest positive-play scores among casino customers, even though sports bettors showed greater financial literacy. Dassopoulos said that contrast underscores why education must be paired with safeguards built into products and access to limits and other support.