1% of disposable income goes to gambling – Too Much or Normal?

[stadus]

In Sweden, the gambling regulator reported that almost 1% of disposable income went to gambling in 2024, about €2.5B total. Most of it came from online casinos and betting. Disposable income BTW is ( salary - taxes + benefits).

For comparison:

Australia – often cited as the highest per capita gambling spend, closer to 3–4% of disposable income in some year
UK – sits roughly around 0.7–0.9%, depending on the measure
Philippines – it's hard to measure because of offshore/illegal markets... ( not well regulated)

[Charles-Tim]

First of all, before your question can be answered accurately, we need to know how many people are gambling in Sweden and what is their population in the country.

Recommended percentage to gamble with is 1%.
If 100% population in the country are gambling, that is not too much at all but that is huge. But it is not possible for everybody in the country to be gambling.

[giammangiato]

In Italy, the numbers are very high and not entirely precise, including illegal immigrants and undeclared gamblers.
But gambling accounts for approximately 7% of the national GDP—a huge sum, €20 billion more than the state spends on the entire National Health Service.
This is sobering; the revenues are truly enormous: on average, an addicted gambler in Italy spends between €2,000 and €3,500 per year, for a total of €157 billion.

[masulum]

IMO, 1% is within the normal and acceptable range for a country gambling expenditure. This percentage doesn't necessarily indicate a widespread social problem. The true measure of the impact isn't just the percentage, but what's happening to society. As long as citizens lives continue without significant negative impacts, such as surge in unemployment, homelessness, or increased poverty, I believe this percentage is safe.

[stadus]

First of all, before your question can be answered accurately, we need to know how many people are gambling in Sweden and what is their population in the country.

Recommended percentage to gamble with is 1%.
If 100% population in the country are gambling, that is not too much at all but that is huge. But it is not possible for everybody in the country to be gambling.

These (below) are the sources on how its computed.. I just rounded it off to 1% just for the sake of discussion.

[1] Sweden gambling revenue edges up to SEK27.85 billion in 2024

[2] https://sigma.world/news/sweden-gambling-industry-revenue-2024/

The total, which covers all operators licensed to offer games of chance in Sweden, equates to SEK 3,325 (€296) per adult resident and represented around 0.9% of disposable income.

[libert19]

I'll go with normal, I mean 1% is nothing, and entertainment that goes comes with it, makes up for it.

...This is sobering; the revenues are truly enormous: on average, an addicted gambler in Italy spends between €2,000 and €3,500 per year, for a total of €157 billion.

Tbh I expected worse amounts from what you mentioned for an 'addicted gambler'.

[Dave1]

In Sweden, the gambling regulator reported that almost 1% of disposable income went to gambling in 2024, about €2.5B total. Most of it came from online casinos and betting. Disposable income BTW is ( salary - taxes + benefits).

For comparison:

Australia – often cited as the highest per capita gambling spend, closer to 3–4% of disposable income in some year
UK – sits roughly around 0.7–0.9%, depending on the measure
Philippines – it's hard to measure because of offshore/illegal markets... ( not well regulated)

It's really hard to know that numbers are, as you have pointed out, some countries have illegal gambling and then some countries might not be into gambling as it is fully regulated. So it's very hard to gauge and say that 1% is normal or too much.

And it only shows how government can tackle the problem though, in Australia as the numbers seems to be high, their government is doing some measure recently to curb out gambling, like stricter regulations and age of a person gambling.

But then there are countries that have regulations in place, mostly in Europe but the population are not really into gambling, maybe few occasions on sports betting.

[KTChampions]

In Sweden, the gambling regulator reported that almost 1% of disposable income went to gambling in 2024, about €2.5B total. Most of it came from online casinos and betting. Disposable income BTW is ( salary - taxes + benefits).

For comparison:

Australia – often cited as the highest per capita gambling spend, closer to 3–4% of disposable income in some year
UK – sits roughly around 0.7–0.9%, depending on the measure
Philippines – it's hard to measure because of offshore/illegal markets... ( not well regulated)

Sweden's population is 10.3 million. This means that in 2024, each Swedish resident (including the elderly and children) spent €242 on gambling. That's €20 per month  
I don't know, maybe the average figures distort the picture too much (although on the other hand, high rollers "take" most of the statistics), but these are insignificant expenses for any country, let alone one as rich as Sweden.
So my answer is: it is more than normal and the costs could be higher (presumably they are actually higher as there is always a black market/gray schemes of illegal gambling).

[Sanitough]

Sweden's population is 10.3 million. This means that in 2024, each Swedish resident (including the elderly and children) spent €242 on gambling. .

I don’t think you should base gambling figures on total population. Not everyone gambles,  kids and people who don’t play are included in that number. If you want a useful metric, use the population of actual gamblers or the money flowing into licensed casinos. That’s a more reliable basis than just total population.

[rbynxx]

Philippines – it's hard to measure because of offshore/illegal markets... ( not well regulated)

It definitely is, and most are likely not submitting accurate figures to the authorities. Based on my estimates, I think it could be around 2–5 percent or possibly even higher, especially given the recent surge in the online gambling industry just this year alone. This growth is precisely why regulators have imposed a ban on e-wallets like GCash, Maya, etc., which make it far easier for gamblers to participate.

[freedomgo]

other countries have a safe percentage, but here in the Philippines it’s different. Even if numbers exist, they won’t be accurate since a lot of unlicensed casinos are being used, so the government can’t really capture the real picture. They think gambling isn’t that rampant, but the reality is it’s everywhere.

The last move where they unlinked e-wallets was already a clear sign that gambling addiction is widespread, but it didn’t solve anything.
It’s still easy to get into casinos now using GCash and other e-wallet providers.

[Hispo]

First of all, before your question can be answered accurately, we need to know how many people are gambling in Sweden and what is their population in the country.

Recommended percentage to gamble with is 1%.
If 100% population in the country are gambling, that is not too much at all but that is huge. But it is not possible for everybody in the country to be gambling.

Sweden itself does not have a specially established fame of being a country of gamblers as it is the case with Nigeria and some countries in the south east or Asia, for example.
So I would guess it is a reasonable percentage for a country, in which the majority of the population does not have the drive to gamble and do not rely on such industry to get by an fund their expenses.

Actually, if you take a look at the influence of gambling in developed countries when compared to developing countries, anyone can see there is a stronger influence on the latter, due to social and economical reasons.

[KTChampions]

Sweden's population is 10.3 million. This means that in 2024, each Swedish resident (including the elderly and children) spent €242 on gambling. .

I don’t think you should base gambling figures on total population. Not everyone gambles,  kids and people who don’t play are included in that number. If you want a useful metric, use the population of actual gamblers or the money flowing into licensed casinos. That’s a more reliable basis than just total population.

Can you read?

I don't know, maybe the average figures distort the picture too much (although on the other hand, high rollers "take" most of the statistics)

It is clear that average figures have disadvantages in how they reflect the real picture, but they do correlate with the real state of affairs. The best metric for determining average spending is to throw out the richest 10% of gamblers (sometimes they can make up 90% of all spending, and this will definitely distort the picture) and the poorest 10%, and only then calculate the average numbers. By the way, I would not be surprised if they are close to those that I calculated.

[Sim_card]

Sweden's population is 10.3 million. This means that in 2024, each Swedish resident (including the elderly and children) spent €242 on gambling. .

I don’t think you should base gambling figures on total population. Not everyone gambles,  kids and people who don’t play are included in that number. If you want a useful metric, use the population of actual gamblers or the money flowing into licensed casinos. That’s a more reliable basis than just total population.

Even when you use the cashflow into licensed casinos, it wouldn't still give the accurate number because if we are to calculate then it should be the metrics for all gamblers in Sweden which will be difficult to get. I feel that underground gambling is also gaining much attention from gamblers and that should also be considered when giving these statistics.

[Mr. Magkaisa]

Philippines – it's hard to measure because of offshore/illegal markets... ( not well regulated)

Not just that, coz most of the income is not recorded, not taxable and from side hustle.
And yes, I agree, many illegal online casino here and money laundering in casino.
1% is a good margin to gamble if you can live a zero gambling. that percent, I can tell that person is a responsible gambler.

[mindrust]

I think 1% is quite reasonable. It is definitely not too much. Lots of people spend way more than that. They even borrow money to keep playing and that’s when it gets very dangerous. 1% disposable income allocation on gambling is nothing compared to the examples I mentioned. I wish all gamblers were as responsible but sadly most of them are too greedy and that’s why they all eventually lose their life savings.

If people that spend 1% of their disposable income on gambling weren’t doing it, they would spend the same amount on something else so it really doesn’t matter as long as they can stop at 1%.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

IMO, if it's just 1% of the total disposable income that went to gambling, then it's normal, because out of 100%, the 99% must sure go into other different things which some has a higher percentage than gambling. I have not made any research on this but I guess some country could have a less or more percentage of disposable income that went into gambling last year, of which what could have determined that amount was the population of that country and also the large number of gamblers there compare to other country.

[Lanatsa]

First of all, before your question can be answered accurately, we need to know how many people are gambling in Sweden and what is their population in the country.

Recommended percentage to gamble with is 1%.
If 100% population in the country are gambling, that is not too much at all but that is huge. But it is not possible for everybody in the country to be gambling.

Sweden itself does not have a specially established fame of being a country of gamblers as it is the case with Nigeria and some countries in the south east or Asia, for example.
So I would guess it is a reasonable percentage for a country, in which the majority of the population does not have the drive to gamble and do not rely on such industry to get by an fund their expenses.

Actually, if you take a look at the influence of gambling in developed countries when compared to developing countries, anyone can see there is a stronger influence on the latter, due to social and economical reasons.

When we talk about gambling in sweden or any country really it’s always good to start from population and actual participation rates because without that we’re just throwing guesses around sweden has about 10 million people and not everyone there is into gambling in fact it’s far from being like macau or las vegas where gambling is seen as a central attraction. The recommended safe percentage of income or funds to gamble with is usually said to be around 1% or even less something you can afford to lose without messing up your life so if everyone in a country gambled exactly 1% of their money technically it wouldn’t look huge but realistically not everyone gambles and those who do are not always sticking to that 1% guideline.

Sweden doesn’t have a global reputation as a gambling hub it’s more known for tech innovation and welfare systems compared to countries like nigeria or parts of southeast asia where gambling is sometimes a big part of culture or even seen as a chance to escape poverty so the impact is different developed nations like sweden usually treat gambling as a regulated form of entertainment whereas in developing countries it can sometimes take on a bigger role because of economic struggles. So in a place like sweden the percentage of gamblers is likely modest and controlled by regulations but the lesson remains the same responsible gambling means small portions never an amount that shakes your financial stability.

[Sanitough]

Sweden's population is 10.3 million. This means that in 2024, each Swedish resident (including the elderly and children) spent €242 on gambling. .

I don’t think you should base gambling figures on total population. Not everyone gambles,  kids and people who don’t play are included in that number. If you want a useful metric, use the population of actual gamblers or the money flowing into licensed casinos. That’s a more reliable basis than just total population.

Even when you use the cashflow into licensed casinos, it wouldn't still give the accurate number because if we are to calculate then it should be the metrics for all gamblers in Sweden which will be difficult to get. I feel that underground gambling is also gaining much attention from gamblers and that should also be considered when giving these statistics.

The figure might be understated, but for reporting purposes that’s still the most valid data we have just to at least get some numbers. The computation has a basis anyway, and I don’t think underground gambling is even included since its hard to get the estimated figure of them.

Can you read?

I don't know, maybe the average figures distort the picture too much (although on the other hand, high rollers "take" most of the statistics)

Obviously… but I want to repeat what I said before -  the data they’re using isn’t based on the total population. Once you start adding kids or minors into the equation, it stops being realistic. You can call it an estimate all you want, but if the basis is wrong, then the estimate is also wrong.

As it says in the OP

Sweden’s gambling industry generated nearly €2.5 billion in 2024

That means revenue, those that are really gambling...

[aoluain]

I'm echoing what others are saying, 1% of disposable income is very little and is possibly
normal. Personally I think its on the low side. We have to remember thats after all other bills and
expenses are paid and of course thats an average amount. There are some who are spending way above
that and are probably in a minority.

I can imagine some people would only have a weekly disposable income of $250, and this is from
considering what I and my friends had on average at one stage in the past so 1% of that is nothing really.
I would have considered 10% at least to be the normal.

In Sweden, the gambling regulator reported that almost 1% of disposable income went to gambling in 2024, about €2.5B total. Most of it came from online casinos and betting. Disposable income BTW is ( salary - taxes + benefits).

For comparison:

Australia – often cited as the highest per capita gambling spend, closer to 3–4% of disposable income in some year
UK – sits roughly around 0.7–0.9%, depending on the measure
Philippines – it's hard to measure because of offshore/illegal markets... ( not well regulated)

Sweden's population is 10.3 million. This means that in 2024, each Swedish resident (including the elderly and children) spent €242 on gambling. That's €20 per month  
I don't know, maybe the average figures distort the picture too much (although on the other hand, high rollers "take" most of the statistics), but these are insignificant expenses for any country, let alone one as rich as Sweden.
So my answer is: it is more than normal and the costs could be higher (presumably they are actually higher as there is always a black market/gray schemes of illegal gambling).

€20 per month still seems way too low even accounting for the entire population.