Betting & Gaming,
according to AI
Every week we ask ChatGPT, Claude and Gemini the questions real UK consumers ask about betting & gaming — and record exactly which brands they put forward. Right now, bet365 owns the conversation.
0 AI answers this run · 0 brands named · measured, never estimated
bet365 is the default answer.
Named in 30% of betting & gaming answers, typically in position 2.3. William Hill follows at 20%, Flutter Entertainment at 18%.
Every brand AI names, ranked.
Visibility is the share of answers naming the brand; citation share is its slice of all brand-owned pages cited; read→cited is how often its pages convert a read into a citation.
| # | Brand | Visibility | Avg. position | Citation share | Read→cited |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | bet365 | 30% | 2.3 | 23% | 30% |
| 2 | William Hill | 20% | 3.2 | 18% | 22% |
| 3 | Flutter Entertainment | 18% | 2.9 | 5% | 100% |
| 4 | Paddy Power | 18% | 2.9 | 0% | — |
| 5 | Sky Bet | 15% | 2.3 | 9% | 0% |
| 6 | Betfred | 10% | 2.5 | 5% | 0% |
| 7 | Entain | 10% | 3.8 | 9% | 67% |
| 8 | BetMGM | 8% | 2.8 | 5% | — |
| 9 | PokerStars | 7% | 2.0 | 18% | 50% |
| 10 | LeoVegas | 7% | 3.5 | 0% | — |
| 11 | Betfair | 7% | 4.0 | 0% | 0% |
| 12 | Betway | 7% | 4.0 | 0% | — |
| 13 | Ladbrokes | 7% | 4.3 | 0% | — |
| 14 | GGPoker | 5% | 1.7 | 0% | — |
| 15 | Casumo | 3% | 1.5 | 5% | 100% |
PokerStars is the betting & gaming brand AI wants most.
Being named is visibility. Underneath it, asked to rate each brand directly, the AI assistants judge it three ways — how much it stands out, how much it belongs, and how much it is returned to. They put 0% of the 40 brands rated above indifference. PokerStars leads the brands the answers name, at 62% of maximum Desire. On attraction, the most divided driver, Paddy Power indexes 131 against Evoke at 82, on a category average of 100.
Each whorl lights one ring per index threshold cleared (84 / 92 / 100 / 108 / 116). Above indifference means Desire above two-thirds of its maximum. See the full betting & gaming desire edition →
The referees of betting & gaming.
The independent sources AI models cite when answering betting & gaming questions — the places a brand needs to be seen, reviewed and ranked.
Entain converts reads into citations. William Hill doesn't.
When Claude or ChatGPT opens a brand's own pages while answering, does the page make the cited-sources list? Entain converts 67% of reads; William Hill just 22%. That gap is a content problem, not a visibility problem.
Full data table
| # | Brand | Visibility | Avg. position | Citation share | Read→cited |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | bet365 | 30% | 2.3 | 23% | 30% |
| 2 | William Hill | 20% | 3.2 | 18% | 22% |
| 3 | Flutter Entertainment | 18% | 2.9 | 5% | 100% |
| 4 | Paddy Power | 18% | 2.9 | 0% | — |
| 5 | Sky Bet | 15% | 2.3 | 9% | 0% |
| 6 | Betfred | 10% | 2.5 | 5% | 0% |
| 7 | Entain | 10% | 3.8 | 9% | 67% |
| 8 | BetMGM | 8% | 2.8 | 5% | — |
| 9 | PokerStars | 7% | 2.0 | 18% | 50% |
| 10 | LeoVegas | 7% | 3.5 | 0% | — |
| 11 | Betfair | 7% | 4.0 | 0% | 0% |
| 12 | Betway | 7% | 4.0 | 0% | — |
| 13 | Ladbrokes | 7% | 4.3 | 0% | — |
| 14 | GGPoker | 5% | 1.7 | 0% | — |
| 15 | Casumo | 3% | 1.5 | 5% | 100% |
The models do not agree on who leads.
Ask about betting & gaming and the brand you are shown depends on the assistant: Claude → bet365, Gemini → bet365, ChatGPT → Paddy Power. Their top-five lists share just 10% of names.
Brands whose visibility swings most between models — the bar per model, widest gap on the right.
The data behind this chart
| Brand | Claude | Gemini | ChatGPT | Spread |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sky Bet | 5% | 30% | 10% | 25pp |
| Paddy Power | 5% | 25% | 25% | 20pp |
| Flutter Entertainment | 5% | 25% | 25% | 20pp |
| BetMGM | 0% | 20% | 5% | 20pp |
| bet365 | 25% | 40% | 25% | 15pp |
| Betfair | 0% | 5% | 15% | 15pp |
| William Hill | 15% | 20% | 25% | 10pp |
| LeoVegas | 10% | 0% | 10% | 10pp |
| Betfred | 5% | 15% | 10% | 10pp |
| Entain | 5% | 10% | 15% | 10pp |
How-to guides carry betting & gaming.
Every page AI opened while answering, classified by what kind of page it is. How-to guides supply the most citations; How-to guides convert best — 95% of the ones models opened were actually cited.
The data behind this chart
| Page type | Cited | Read but not cited | Conversion |
|---|---|---|---|
| How-to guides | 80 | 4 | 95% |
| Listicles | 62 | 7 | 90% |
| Comparisons | 60 | 11 | 85% |
| Editorial | 48 | 51 | 48% |
| Documentation | 39 | 16 | 71% |
| Product pages | 21 | 5 | 81% |
| Community threads | 14 | 11 | 56% |
| Other | 14 | 18 | 44% |
Structured data is what separates cited from ignored.
Of the betting & gaming pages models actually opened, how much more often each feature's pages ended up in the cited sources. Structured data is worth 16 percentage points; cites its sources pages fare 66pp worse. Measured within the read population, so selection can't flatter it.
The data behind this chart
| Feature | Pages with | Cited % | Pages without | Cited % | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Structured data | 342 | 79% | 183 | 63% | +16pp |
| Answer up front | 299 | 76% | 226 | 69% | +7pp |
| Updated this year | 238 | 75% | 287 | 71% | +4pp |
| Named author | 233 | 73% | 292 | 73% | +0pp |
| Hard statistics | 181 | 71% | 344 | 74% | -4pp |
| Comparison table | 214 | 69% | 311 | 76% | -8pp |
| Cites its sources | 46 | 13% | 479 | 79% | -66pp |
bet365 builds pages AI can quote.
Readiness scores each brand's own pages on the structure models reward — a direct answer up front, tables, hard numbers, named authors, structured data, recency, specifications. Kindred Group is the widest gap: well-built pages that still aren't converting into citations.
| Brand | Readiness | Pages cited | Pages profiled |
|---|---|---|---|
| bet365 | 30 | 11% | 83 |
| Kindred Group | 28 | 0% | 29 |
| Grosvenor Sport | 25 | 40% | 5 |
| Sky Bet | 23 | 36% | 14 |
| Betfair | 23 | 10% | 21 |
| BoyleSports | 21 | 0% | 3 |
| BetMGM | 20 | 31% | 13 |
| William Hill | 20 | 47% | 15 |
| GGPoker | 18 | 3% | 30 |
| Betfred | 17 | 25% | 8 |
Readiness is the share of eight measurable structural signals present on a brand's profiled pages. It is a build-quality measure, not a ranking of the brand.
The questions betting & gaming pages have to settle.
Read straight off the pages AI cited: the consumer questions cited content answers most often. Content that fails to settle these is content models have no reason to quote.
Nineteen more categories.
Method: 20 unbranded consumer prompts per category, spread across the buying journey, run weekly against ChatGPT, Claude and Gemini. Read→cited uses Claude and ChatGPT only (Gemini does not separate the two). Correlational observations of model behaviour at the time of the run. Data from the run completed Sat, 17 Oct 2026 13:12:10 GMT.