Flutter frustrated with Brazilian ban, J.P. Morgan analyst says
As Brazil’s new proscription against igaming and sports betting lengthens, Flutter Entertainment executives said it “has been frustrating,” J.P. Morgan analyst Daniel Politzer wrote in a 30 September investor note. Politzer met with Flutter CEO Peter Jackson and Director of Investor Relations Paul Tymms at G2E in Las Vegas.
Flutter’s FanDuel subsidiary was said to be experiencing potent trends in handle. Management attributed this to more-generous promotions and “solid loyalty-program engagement,” as Politzer put it.
Management reported no late-summer lull, as the World Cup had re-engaged 700,000 customers and carried over business into early NFL season. As for the latter, FanDuel kept its own counsel as to whether the on-field results had been good or adverse.
Politzer said it “was unclear if Flutter has seen any unfavorable hold effect from recent NFL outcomes.” But he noted that other sports betting operators met at G2E characterized their NFL hold as “benign.”
In its igaming sphere, Flutter played down August softness, attributing much of it to the anniversary of “Huff N’ Puff,” leading to weaker comparisons. The August calendar, with its fewer weekend days, also was faulted and the World Cup was said to have drawn off some business from igaming.
With regard to Flutter’s prediction-market initiatives, Politzer observed that the company “is mainly focused on near-term market-making economics, while balancing the need to strategically invest to acquire customers in non-OSB states ahead of any eventual OSB legalization.”
The analyst pointed out the Flutter was involved in several major exchanges, including Crypto.com, Kalshi and DKeX, and it took heart from initial trading volumes. “Further, its gained traction via product improvements from the national One App rollout (marketing synergies) and an expanded Crypto.com catalog, though capabilities/promotions remain more limited than OSB,” Politzer wrote.
However, Flutter executives played down potential cannibalization of online sports betting by prediction markets, which they felt were making a minimal incursion. They thought prediction markets might continue to be legalized at the state level, while waiting for further clarity on the issue from the US Supreme Court.
In Brazil, Flutter plans to put its operations on ice for the remainder of 2026, resulting in US$20 million lower cash flow and USS$70 million less revenue. With Brazil’s political situation said to be in flux, Flutter execs did not believe the ban was there to stay.
The Brazilian setback was offset internationally on other fronts. In Italy, Flutter reported hefty product demand and excellent progress in its integration of SNAI. The Philippines was seen as a new opportunity for expansion, aa well.
In the United Kingdom, Flutter felt it was being counterintuitive, accelerating its marketing at a time when rival operators were curbing theirs. Again, the World Cup was seen as a significant volume driver.
Flutter bosses took heart in their international diversity, opining that it would propel growth that was both significant and robust. Politzer added that “ongoing cost optimization initiatives should also drive improved margins in the coming years.”
David McKee is an award-winning journalist who has three decades of experience covering the gaming industry.
Dig Deeper
Related stories
2025/09/02: Prediction markets ‘too good to pass up’ for OSB operators, J.P. Morgan analyst says
2025/10/03: Prediction-market fears overhyped, analyst says
2026/09/24: Flutter execs hope for prediction-market shutdown, analyst says
2026/08/12: Flutter trying to get its mojo back, J.P. Morgan analyst says
2025/09/02: Prediction markets ‘too good to pass up’ for OSB operators, J.P. Morgan analyst says
2025/10/03: Prediction-market fears overhyped, analyst says
2026/09/24: Flutter execs hope for prediction-market shutdown, analyst says
2026/08/12: Flutter trying to get its mojo back, J.P. Morgan analyst says
The Backstory
Brazil adds to a crowded list of uncertainties
Flutter Entertainment’s latest frustration in Brazil lands at a time when investors already are testing the company’s tolerance for regulatory ambiguity, promotional spending and new competition from prediction markets. The company’s decision to pause Brazil operations through the rest of 2026, as described in the current J.P. Morgan note, is not an isolated setback. It follows months in which analysts have weighed whether Flutter’s global scale can offset pressure in the U.S., higher taxes in mature markets and shifting rules in emerging ones.
The Brazilian issue matters because Flutter had expected international diversification to steady earnings while FanDuel worked to regain share in U.S. online sports betting. Instead, Brazil has become another variable. Executives previously told J.P. Morgan that the country was a wild card, with President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva pursuing a harder line on igaming. In a September meeting, Flutter leaders were still assuming the existing framework would continue and expected Brazil to reach break-even in 2027, according to J.P. Morgan analyst Daniel Politzer’s account of meetings with Flutter executives. The new pause shows how quickly that assumption changed.
FanDuel’s U.S. reset frames the pressure
The Brazil hit also comes as Flutter tries to restore momentum at FanDuel, its most important growth engine. In August, Politzer described Flutter as a “show-me story,” pointing to a stock that had fallen sharply from its highs and a U.S. business that needed sharper execution. FanDuel’s online sports betting share had slipped to 39% from 47%, and leadership changes at both Flutter and FanDuel added to the sense that the business was in transition, according to J.P. Morgan’s earlier assessment of Flutter’s attempt to regain its U.S. edge.
The company’s response was to spend more on customers. Flutter executives later acknowledged they may have pushed monetization too hard, especially after a period in which results favored the books and promotional generosity lagged rivals. FanDuel raised promotional intensity, leaned on rewards and used more targeted offers to rebuild activity. That appeared to help. By late September, management was reporting better U.S. trends, stronger active-player growth and payback periods that still fit within internal thresholds.
Those U.S. gains make the Brazilian disruption more important, not less. If FanDuel’s rebound requires heavier promotions, cash generated elsewhere becomes more valuable. A regulatory pause in Brazil therefore reduces flexibility at the same time Flutter is investing to defend its largest market. The company’s argument is that scale, product depth and international breadth can carry it through. The risk is that several geographies demand capital or patience at once.
Prediction markets move from side issue to core debate
Prediction markets have become the central market narrative around Flutter and DraftKings because they challenge the boundary between federally regulated event contracts and state-regulated sports betting. For operators, the appeal is clear. Prediction markets could allow exposure to sports outcomes in states where online sports betting is not legal, including large prizes such as Texas and Georgia. Politzer argued in early September that the opportunity was “too good to pass up” for major online sports betting operators, even as it carried legal, political and reputational risk.
The tension is that FanDuel and DraftKings benefit from state-regulated sports betting systems, but prediction markets may bypass state licensing, taxation and consumer-protection regimes through federal Commodity Futures Trading Commission oversight. That has alarmed state regulators, tribes, sports leagues and responsible-gambling advocates. Operators that move too aggressively could antagonize the same stakeholders whose support they need for sports betting or igaming expansion.
Flutter’s position has been cautious and opportunistic. The company has explored market-making and product options through platforms including Crypto.com, Kalshi and DKeX, while executives have played down near-term cannibalization of conventional online sports betting. Politzer’s current note says Flutter is focused on market-making economics and customer acquisition in states without legal sports betting. That approach seeks upside without fully abandoning the regulated sportsbook model that built FanDuel’s scale.
Regulatory clarity remains the swing factor
Flutter executives have signaled that uncertainty is worse than an adverse but clear ruling. In September, they told Politzer that a shutdown of sports event contracts would likely be the best outcome for the company, because it would protect regulated online sports betting from a federal workaround. That view reflected the importance of legal clarity after a Ninth Circuit ruling and amid continuing disputes over whether sports event contracts are effectively sports bets.
The market has reacted harshly to each sign that prediction markets could encroach further. After Kalshi teased new products, shares of DraftKings and Flutter fell sharply, prompting Politzer to argue that investors were overreacting to the prediction-market threat. He said the sell-off ignored the product, brand and database advantages built by established online sports betting companies over years of expensive customer acquisition.
A Nevada ruling involving Crypto.com added another layer. A federal judge denied the company’s request for an injunction against the Nevada Gaming Control Board and ruled that sports-event contracts did not constitute derivative swaps. For traditional operators, the decision suggested that courts may not simply accept the broadest claims for federally preempted sports contracts. Still, no single ruling has settled the national question. Until that happens, Flutter is managing a business in which potential rivals can test limits faster than state legislatures and courts can define them.
Analysts split on threat or opportunity
Wall Street’s debate over Flutter is not just about whether prediction markets hurt FanDuel. It is about whether Flutter can turn the same disruption into a new profit pool. Jefferies analyst James Wheatcroft has taken the more bullish side, arguing that fears of cannibalization are overstated and that market-making could be incremental to Flutter. In July, he said the company was approaching a positive inflection point and that the prediction-market threat to Flutter was overrated.
Wheatcroft estimated that market making and FanDuel Predicts could add substantial cash flow if Flutter captured meaningful share, particularly in states where online sports betting remains illegal. His thesis was that Flutter’s pricing models, customer base and brand recognition could give it an edge over exchange-native competitors, while regulators would still prefer licensed sports betting over a less familiar federal alternative.
Politzer has been more guarded. He sees a real market-expansion opportunity but also says legal ambiguity could weigh on valuations until regulators and courts decide what is permitted. That distinction matters for the current Brazil story. Flutter’s investment case rests on navigating uncertain rules better than smaller rivals. But Brazil, India, U.K. taxes and U.S. prediction markets show that regulatory risk is not confined to one region or product.
Global scale is the defense, but execution is the test
Flutter’s best counterargument remains diversification. Italy has been strong, SNAI integration is progressing and the company sees possible expansion in the Philippines. In the U.K. and Ireland, management has leaned on cost cuts and marketing to offset tax pressure. In the U.S., FanDuel’s promotional reset appears to have improved handle and engagement heading into football season.
Brazil complicates that story because it was supposed to be part of the international growth portfolio, not a drag on 2026 revenue and cash flow. The company does not believe the ban will be permanent, and Brazil’s political environment remains fluid. But a pause still forces investors to discount expected growth and ask whether Flutter’s broad footprint is reducing risk or merely spreading exposure across more unpredictable regimes.
The stakes are straightforward. If FanDuel continues to regain share, prediction markets stay contained and Brazil reopens on workable terms, Flutter’s scale could again look like a competitive advantage. If regulatory shocks keep arriving while the company spends more to defend the U.S., investors may continue to demand proof before restoring the valuation Flutter once commanded.
