A recent global study on the role of artificial intelligence in the gambling industry has revealed that the pace of AI adoption is outstripping the establishment of necessary oversight measures. Companies are increasingly deploying AI tools without adequate governance frameworks to mitigate potential risks.
The report, titled The State of AI in Gaming 2026, was collaboratively published by the UNLV International Gaming Institute’s AI Research Hub and KPMG LLP. This inaugural edition aims to serve as an annual benchmark, tracking the influence of AI on the global gambling landscape.
Utilizing survey data from 83 gambling firms and 113 regulators worldwide, the study also incorporates a comprehensive 15-year analysis of academic research, patent applications, and expert insights. It evaluates the gambling sector in four key areas: AI utilization maturity, regulatory evolution, innovation activities, and responsible implementation practices.
The findings indicate that the gambling industry is still in the nascent stages of AI maturity, achieving an average score of 45 out of 100 on the report’s index. While numerous companies have articulated plans for AI integration, the report highlights that the necessary infrastructure and expertise are not yet sufficiently developed for widespread implementation.
Kasra Ghaharian, director of research at IGI and editor-in-chief of the report, stated, “Society is at a pivotal moment with AI, and until now, there has been no thorough, independent baseline to assess the gambling industry's position.”
He added, “The State of AI in Gaming aims to bridge this gap, providing a crucial resource for operators, regulators, researchers, and all stakeholders involved in the adoption, ROI, and responsible integration of AI in the gambling sector.”
The report identifies governance as the weakest area measured, scoring only 30 out of 100. It reveals that merely 20% of companies have a dedicated AI governance role, and many lack formal policies or are still in the early stages of developing them. This discrepancy highlights the imbalance between the rapid adoption of AI and the slow establishment of necessary controls.
Rick Arpin, executive editor and KPMG U.S. gaming lead, remarked, “The data illustrates a distinct gap between ambition and execution. Governance is where this gap is most pronounced.”
He cautioned that with governance scoring just 30 out of 100 and most organizations lacking dedicated oversight for AI, many firms are progressing faster in AI adoption than in implementing the controls needed to manage it. “Those who address this issue now will be in a better position to harness value and minimize unnecessary risks,” he added.
The study also points out the uneven adoption of various AI technologies. Over 80% of the companies surveyed reported using generative AI for tasks like content creation and data analysis, while significantly fewer have embraced agentic AI systems that can independently plan, make decisions, and execute actions.
This slower adoption of more advanced AI technologies is attributed to the regulatory sensitivities inherent in gambling operations, where autonomous systems must comply with legal standards and ensure player protection.
A significant finding of the report is the disparity in perceptions between regulators and operators regarding AI usage. Regulators have expressed limited insight into how licensed operators employ AI and have low confidence in both industry practices and their own oversight capabilities. Both parties, however, recognize that responsible AI frameworks are still underdeveloped across the sector.
Simo Dragicevic, executive editor and co-founder of AiR Hub, stated, “The disconnect between regulators and the industry is one of the most significant findings of this report. Regulators feel they lack the ability to effectively oversee AI use among licensees, and the data confirms they often have an incomplete view.”
He added, “Currently, responsible AI practices in the industry are at best in their infancy. As AI becomes more integrated into operations, the urgency to address this oversight gap will only increase.”