FanDuel details how it detects and responds to signs of gambling harm amid congressional scrutiny

FanDuel has set out how it monitors customers for signs of problem gambling, responding to growing scrutiny of how US sportsbooks use data and technology. The operator has added the details to a Fast Facts page on its website and says it carried out more than 58,000 manual responsible gambling reviews over the past year.

The pressure follows a New York Times article featuring former DraftKings employees. The interviewees suggested the rival operator may have used technology to identify players likely to spend more and to encourage them with bonus offers, an approach described internally as "elasticity." DraftKings has denied any wrongdoing and says its technology has not been used to the detriment of players.

FanDuel is also answering questions from Congress. Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and US Reps. Paul Tonko (D-NY) and Valerie Foushee (D-NC) have been leading the demands for information. Cory Fox, FanDuel's senior vice president of public policy and sustainability, gave lawmakers a written reply that broadly matches the content of the Fast Facts page.

According to the company, it relies on machine learning and risk scoring to watch behavioral patterns such as unusual deposits, excessive time on site, chasing losses and concerning customer service interactions. Fox said the responsible gaming team also tracks deposit and withdrawal history, increases in wager size, canceled withdrawals and statements made in the in-app chat that point to distress or a gambling problem.

FanDuel stresses that the review process is not automated. It says trained professionals examine flagged accounts, and depending on the outcome the company may recommend gambling education, set limits on an account, or exclude the player entirely. It adds that problem gambling resources are offered free through partners such as Kindbridge Behavioral Services.

Scrutiny of how sportsbooks target customers is expected to continue, with FanDuel, DraftKings and other operators likely to face tougher requests to explain internal processes. The Massachusetts Gaming Commission, for example, is currently reviewing how licensees use artificial intelligence.