Why clearer self-exclusion information matters
A Casino.net Research Lab review of 903 self-exclusion listings found wide variation in whether exclusion periods were recorded, with Great Britain showing the highest rate among markets with at least ten listings.
A Casino.net Research Lab analysis of 903 self-exclusion listings across 540 casino brands in 64 markets found 409 recorded a period. The researchers said missing durations do not necessarily mean operators lack effective exclusions, only that the information was not captured in the database examined. The study used 1,064 live operator-market records as of 5 October 2026.
Recorded information varied by market. Great Britain had a period in 117 of 132 listings, or 88.6 per cent, the highest among 31 markets with at least ten listings. Germany recorded three of 25, Ireland four of 23 and Romania seven of 28, while Andorra and Nigeria had none. The report cautioned that gaps in recorded data differ from legal protections, citing Germany’s OASIS register and its one-year default.
Durations ranged from eight listings of 30 days or less to 64 without an end date. Betclic in Poland listed up to 21 years, Stake in Norway up to ten years and Hippodrome in Great Britain up to six years. The researchers said clearer terminology could help players compare protective tools.
