Is Binary Trading a Gambling?

Table of Contents

I. Introduction

A. Overview

Binary options represent a category of financial derivatives characterized by a unique, predetermined payout structure contingent upon a binary, yes/no outcome.¹ These instruments allow traders to speculate on the directional movement of various underlying assets—such as stocks, foreign exchange (forex) pairs, commodities, or market indices—within a defined timeframe, without necessitating ownership of the asset itself.³ In recent years, binary options have gained considerable visibility, largely facilitated by the proliferation of online trading platforms.¹ However, this rise in popularity has been paralleled by significant controversy and intense regulatory scrutiny globally, stemming from concerns about their risk profile, operational practices, and fundamental nature.²

related posts : Best Binary Options Brokers (in 2025)

B. The Central Question

The distinct mechanics and risk-reward characteristics of binary options have fueled a persistent debate: does this form of trading constitute a legitimate financial activity, or does it more closely resemble gambling? This report aims to address this central question through a comprehensive analysis. It will evaluate the extent to which binary options trading aligns with the fundamental definitions and characteristics of gambling by examining its operational mechanics, the interplay of skill and chance, its risk/reward structure relative to traditional gambling and investing, its treatment by financial regulators, the perspectives of market experts, and the documented outcomes for retail participants.

C. Report Structure

To provide a thorough assessment, this report will proceed systematically. It will first define binary options trading and gambling, establishing clear operational and conceptual frameworks. Subsequently, it will analyze the crucial element of skill versus chance within binary options trading. A comparative analysis will follow, contrasting the risk/reward profiles of binary options with both traditional gambling activities and conventional financial investments. The report will then delve into the regulatory landscape, examining how major financial authorities classify and regulate these instruments. Perspectives from financial experts and consumer protection agencies will be explored, followed by an investigation into the typical success and failure rates of retail traders. Finally, the report will synthesize these findings to offer a concluding evaluation on the classification of binary options trading relative to gambling.

II. Defining Binary Options Trading

A. Core Mechanics

Binary options are derivative financial instruments enabling speculation on the price trajectory of an underlying asset over a specified period.³ Unlike traditional options or direct asset trading, binary options do not confer ownership rights or obligations regarding the underlying asset.¹ Instead, the trader engages in a proposition concerning the asset’s price movement relative to a predetermined level, known as the “strike price,” at a specific future point in time, the “expiry time”.¹

The fundamental mechanism involves a binary, “yes/no” question: Will the price of the chosen underlying asset (e.g., the EUR/USD exchange rate, the price of gold, the value of the S&P 500 index) be above or below the strike price at the moment of expiration?.² The trader selects “yes” (often termed a “call” or “up” option) if they predict the price will be above the strike, or “no” (a “put” or “down” option) if they predict it will be at or below the strike price.⁷ A defining characteristic of many binary options is their extremely short duration, with expiry times frequently measured in minutes or even seconds, although hourly, daily, or weekly expiries also exist.³ This short-term nature distinguishes them significantly from many traditional investment horizons.¹⁶

B. Payout Structure

The term “binary” directly reflects the instrument’s defining feature: an “all-or-nothing” payout structure.¹ If the trader’s prediction proves correct at expiry – the option finishes “in the money” – they receive a predetermined, fixed payout.¹ Conversely, if the prediction is incorrect – the option finishes “out of the money” – the trader forfeits the entire amount they invested in the option, known as the premium.¹ There is typically no middle ground; the outcome is one of these two discrete possibilities.¹

The pricing and payout mechanics can vary depending on the trading venue. On regulated U.S. exchanges like Nadex, binary options contracts are priced between $0 and $100.² The price fluctuates based on market sentiment and the perceived probability of the option finishing in the money.¹⁰ A trader buying an option pays the offer price (e.g., $44.50), and their maximum potential profit is $100 minus the purchase price (e.g., $100 – $44.50 = $55.50), while their maximum risk is the purchase price itself ($44.50).¹ Selling an option involves receiving the bid price (e.g., $42.50), with the maximum profit being the bid price received and the maximum risk being $100 minus the bid price (e.g., $100 – $42.50 = $57.50).¹⁰ In this model, the maximum potential profit and loss for any contract always sum to $100, representing a zero-sum game between the buyer and seller, before transaction costs.¹

However, many online platforms, particularly those operating outside stringent regulatory frameworks, employ a different structure. Here, a winning trade yields a fixed percentage return on the amount invested, often advertised as being between 70% and 90%.¹ A losing trade, conversely, results in the loss of 100% of the invested amount.¹ This asymmetric structure, where the potential percentage gain is less than the potential percentage loss, inherently creates a negative expected value for the trader, assuming random chance.¹²

C. Common Types

While the core concept remains consistent, various types of binary options exist, offering different conditions for payout. The most common is the Call/Put (or Up/Down, High/Low) option described above.⁹ Other variations include “Touch/No Touch” options, where the trader predicts whether the asset’s price will reach (touch) a specific price level at least once before expiry, or fail to reach it (no touch).¹⁸ “Range” or “Boundary” options involve predicting whether the asset’s price will remain within a specified price range until expiry or break out of it.¹⁸

D. Trading Environment

The environment in which binary options are traded is a critical factor. In the United States, binary options can be traded legally on a limited number of regulated exchanges, such as Nadex (North American Derivatives Exchange) and as event futures on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME).¹⁰ These exchanges operate under the oversight of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) or the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), providing standardized contracts and regulatory safeguards.¹³

However, a significant portion, likely the vast majority, of the global binary options market operates through online platforms that are often based offshore and may not comply with the regulatory requirements of major jurisdictions like the US, EU, or Australia.¹ These unregulated or poorly regulated platforms present substantial risks to traders, including the potential for fraud, manipulation, and difficulty in recovering funds.¹

E. Underlying Structure and Implications

The apparent simplicity of the binary option’s “yes/no” proposition is often highlighted as a key attraction, particularly for novice traders.⁷ This straightforward concept makes the instrument seem easily understandable compared to more complex derivatives. However, this surface simplicity can be misleading. It obscures the underlying probabilistic complexities and, crucially, the often disadvantageous payout structure inherent in many platforms.¹ The common scenario where a winning trade returns less than 100% of the stake, while a losing trade forfeits 100%, means that a trader needs a win rate significantly higher than 50% just to break even.¹² This structural disadvantage is not always apparent from the simplified marketing narrative.

Furthermore, the fact that binary options trading does not involve acquiring ownership of the underlying asset fundamentally distinguishes it from traditional forms of investment like buying stocks or bonds.¹ In traditional investing, ownership (or a creditor claim) provides a link to the underlying economic value generated by the asset or entity. Binary options, by contrast, sever this link, existing purely as a speculative contract on price direction.¹ This detachment from ownership aligns the structure more closely with that of a wager on a future event outcome, rather than a capital allocation towards productive assets.

III. Defining Gambling

A. Core Elements

Gambling, in its fundamental sense, involves the act of risking something of value – typically money, referred to as the stake or consideration – on an event characterized by an uncertain outcome.²⁹ This action is undertaken with the primary intention or hope of winning something of greater value, the prize or return.³⁰ The essential components are thus consideration (the wager), risk (chance or uncertainty), and a potential prize.³³ The outcome of the wager hinges, at least partially, on chance, meaning it is not fully predictable or controllable by the participant.³⁰ This element of uncertainty is central to the definition.³⁰

B. Spectrum of Chance vs. Skill

It is important to recognize that gambling activities are not monolithic in their reliance on chance. They exist along a spectrum.³² At one end lie activities based purely on random chance, where skill plays virtually no role in determining the outcome. Examples include lotteries, roulette, or slot machines.³⁰ At the other end, activities like poker or sports betting incorporate significant elements of skill, strategy, knowledge, and analysis.³² In these cases, skillful play or informed betting can improve a participant’s odds relative to less skilled participants or uninformed bets. However, even in skill-influenced gambling, a fundamental element of chance or uncertainty remains inherent in the outcome (e.g., the turn of a card, the performance of athletes, unpredictable events).³³ Skill can shift probabilities but cannot guarantee results or eliminate the underlying risk.

C. Key Characteristics

Several characteristics are commonly associated with gambling activities:

House Edge/Negative Expected Value: Commercial gambling operations (casinos, bookmakers, lotteries) are typically structured to ensure long-term profitability for the operator.³² This is achieved through a “house edge,” where the odds offered or the game’s structure provide a statistical advantage to the operator.²⁸ Consequently, for the average participant, the expected value of gambling over the long run is negative – the more one plays, the more likely they are to lose money overall.³²
Psychological Factors: Gambling is often linked to specific psychological drivers and effects. It can provide excitement, stimulation, and relief from boredom.³² The act of risk-taking itself can be reinforcing.³² However, gambling is also associated with cognitive biases that can distort perception of odds, such as the gambler’s fallacy (believing past outcomes influence future independent events) or optimism bias (overestimating the likelihood of desired outcomes).³³ Crucially, gambling carries the potential for addiction, recognized clinically as Gambling Disorder.²⁹ This disorder is characterized by impaired control over gambling, increasing priority given to it, and continuation despite negative consequences.²⁹

D. Distinction from Investment

While both gambling and investing involve risk and uncertainty, several key distinctions are generally drawn:

Economic Utility: Investments are typically seen as contributing to economic utility, such as providing capital for businesses (stocks) or governments (bonds), facilitating market functions, or holding assets with intrinsic value.³³ Gambling, in contrast, is often viewed as a sterile transfer of wealth based on event outcomes, without inherent productive purpose.²⁴
Expected Returns: Legitimate investments are generally undertaken with the expectation of positive returns over the long term, driven by factors like economic growth, company earnings, interest accrual, or asset appreciation.³³ As noted, gambling typically involves a negative expected return for the participant due to the house edge.³²
Underlying Value: Investments are usually tied to an underlying asset or enterprise that possesses value independent of the risk being taken (e.g., a company’s assets, earnings potential, or a property’s utility).³³ The “value” in a gambling proposition is primarily derived from the wager itself and the odds offered.
Analysis and Time Horizon: Investment decisions often rely on thorough analysis (fundamental or technical), risk management strategies (like diversification and hedging), and frequently involve longer time horizons aimed at capturing value growth.¹⁷ Gambling often focuses on short-term outcomes of uncertain events, where analysis might be limited or its effectiveness constrained by randomness.⁴¹

The presence of risk or the application of skill are not, in themselves, the absolute dividing lines between gambling and investing. A more critical distinction lies in the fundamental nature of the activity. Is it primarily a wager placed on a short-term, often random event, structured with a negative expected return for the participant? Or is it an allocation of capital towards an asset or endeavor with underlying economic value, offering a potential for positive long-term returns based on analysis and market dynamics? This difference in structural expectation and connection to economic substance appears central.

Furthermore, the formal recognition of Gambling Disorder as a behavioral addiction, classified alongside substance use disorders in diagnostic manuals like the DSM-5 and ICD-11 ²⁹, underscores the unique potential for harm associated with activities fitting the gambling paradigm. This classification reflects research showing similarities in brain pathways, clinical expression, and potential for devastating consequences (financial ruin, relationship breakdown, mental health issues, suicide risk).²⁹ Activities sharing core gambling characteristics may thus carry heightened risks due to these potent psychological mechanisms.

IV. The Role of Skill vs. Chance in Binary Options

The debate over whether binary options trading is predominantly skill-based or chance-driven is central to its classification relative to gambling. Arguments exist on both sides, reflecting the instrument’s unique characteristics.

A. Arguments for Skill

Proponents and trading platforms often emphasize the potential role of skill in binary options trading.⁷ They argue that traders can improve their odds of success by employing analytical techniques commonly used in other financial markets:

Technical Analysis: This involves studying historical price data and chart patterns to predict future price movements.⁹ Specific tools suggested include moving averages, Bollinger Bands, Relative Strength Index (RSI), Commodity Channel Index (CCI), ADX, and candlestick patterns.⁴ The premise is that identifying trends, volatility patterns, support/resistance levels, or overbought/oversold conditions can inform directional predictions.⁴
Fundamental Analysis: This approach involves analyzing economic news releases, market events, company reports, and geopolitical factors that might influence asset prices.⁷ Trading based on the anticipated impact of such news is presented as a viable strategy.⁹
Strategy and Discipline: Success is also linked to developing a coherent trading plan, employing effective risk management (e.g., limiting capital risked per trade), maintaining emotional control, learning from mistakes, and choosing appropriate assets and expiry times.⁹ Some sources explicitly frame binary options trading as a “game of pure skill,” contrasting it with chance-based casino games.²⁸

B. Arguments for Chance/Limitations of Skill

Despite the arguments for skill, numerous factors suggest that chance plays a dominant role, particularly in the context of how binary options are commonly traded:

Extreme Short Timeframes: Many binary options contracts have extremely short durations, often expiring in minutes or even seconds.¹² Predicting the precise direction of price movement over such brief intervals is exceptionally challenging, even for seasoned financial professionals.¹² Over very short periods, price movements are often dominated by random fluctuations (“market noise”) rather than clear, predictable trends or fundamental shifts.¹⁴ As one source notes, “No one, not even the best professional forex traders, can know what will happen to an exchange rate in the next 5 or 10 minutes”.¹²
Ineffectiveness of Analytical Tools: The efficacy of standard analytical tools is questionable within these short timeframes. Technical indicators are often “lagging,” meaning they are based on past data and may not accurately predict immediate future movements, especially in volatile markets.⁴ They can generate “false signals,” leading to incorrect trades.⁴ The complexity of accurately applying and interpreting these tools under rapid-fire conditions adds another layer of difficulty.⁴ A recent academic study attempting to predict Bitcoin price movements on short timeframes (3, 5, 15 minutes) using various models found limited predictability, with the best model achieving only 66% accuracy, suggesting a substantial random component.¹⁴
Expert Opinions and Comparisons: A significant body of opinion from financial experts, regulators, and commentators explicitly compares binary options to gambling, wagers, or betting, implicitly highlighting the perceived dominance of chance.¹ Some sources go further, stating that for very short-term options (e.g., 60 seconds), skill offers virtually no advantage, and outcomes depend purely on luck.³⁷
Nature as Pure Speculation: Binary options are often described as instruments of “pure speculation” ¹, focusing solely on short-term price direction rather than underlying value or long-term investment principles.

C. Synthesis and Analysis

While it is undeniable that traders can apply analytical methods and strategies to binary options, the practical effectiveness of these skills is severely constrained by the typical structure and trading environment. The shorter the expiration time, the less likely it is that traditional analysis can provide a reliable edge over random chance. Market noise tends to overwhelm discernible signals on micro time scales. This contrasts sharply with traditional stock or options trading, where longer time horizons allow fundamental factors to exert more influence and technical trends to develop more reliably.¹⁶

The very structure of binary options seems almost engineered to amplify the role of chance, particularly through the emphasis on extremely short expiries. While platforms may promote quick results and numerous trading opportunities ⁴³, this high frequency, short-duration environment inherently makes reliable prediction difficult. It creates an experience that can feel like a “rush” ¹⁶ but functionally operates closer to a series of coin flips ²³ or roulette spins ³⁷, where analysis struggles to gain traction against randomness.

Furthermore, the binary nature of the outcome itself – predicting only direction (above/below a strike) – simplifies the complex dynamics of financial markets and ignores the crucial element of the magnitude of price movement.¹ In traditional trading, profitability often depends not just on being directionally correct, but on how much the price moves in the predicted direction. Skills related to assessing potential move size, managing trades based on evolving price action, or using volatility analysis to gauge potential profit are largely nullified in the binary options context. This simplification reduces the dimensions available for skill application compared to traditional financial instruments, pushing the activity further towards a simple directional bet where chance plays a larger relative role.

V. Comparative Risk and Reward Structures

Understanding how the risk and reward profile of binary options compares to traditional gambling and traditional financial investments is crucial for assessing its nature.

A. Binary Options

Risk: The maximum risk in a binary options trade is fixed and known upfront.⁸ It is limited to the amount paid for the option (the premium).¹ If the option expires out-of-the-money, the trader loses this entire invested amount, but no more.¹
Reward: Similarly, the potential reward is fixed and known before entering the trade.⁸ If the option expires in-the-money, the trader receives a predetermined payout.¹ On regulated exchanges, this is typically $100 per contract, resulting in a profit of $100 minus the purchase price.¹ On many online platforms, the payout is a fixed percentage of the investment (e.g., 70-90%), meaning the profit is this percentage amount.¹
Structure: The defining characteristic is the “all-or-nothing” structure.¹ The outcome is strictly binary: either the fixed payout is received, or the entire stake is lost. It operates as a zero-sum game between participants (excluding broker fees or edge), where one party’s gain directly corresponds to another party’s loss.¹⁰ A critical feature, especially on non-exchange platforms, is the frequently asymmetric payout, where the potential percentage gain on a win is less than the 100% loss on a losing trade.¹ This asymmetry creates a structural disadvantage or negative expected value for the trader.²

B. Traditional Gambling (Casino Games/Sports Betting)

Risk: The risk is typically the amount wagered or bet.²⁹ This amount can be fixed per bet (e.g., a $10 bet on roulette) or variable depending on the game (e.g., poker).
Reward: The potential reward is determined by the odds set by the casino or bookmaker.¹⁶ These odds reflect the perceived probability of the outcome, adjusted to include the operator’s profit margin (the house edge).³² Payouts can be fixed (e.g., 35-to-1 for a single number in roulette) or variable (e.g., parimutuel betting in horse racing).
Structure: Outcomes are based on random events (casino games) or uncertain future events (sports).³⁴ The structure nearly always incorporates a statistical advantage for the operator, ensuring long-term profitability for the house.²⁸

C. Traditional Financial Investments (Stocks/Bonds)

Risk: The risk in traditional investments is variable and depends on the asset and investment strategy.¹ While losses can be substantial, potentially exceeding the initial investment if leverage (like margin) is used, outcomes are not typically all-or-nothing in the same way as binary options.¹⁷ Losses can be partial or accrue gradually. Various risk management tools like diversification, stop-loss orders, and hedging strategies can be employed to mitigate risk.¹⁷
Reward: Potential rewards are also variable and generally not fixed or capped upfront.¹ Stock investments offer the potential for significant capital appreciation (theoretically unlimited) and dividends. Bonds offer interest payments and return of principal. Profitability depends on the magnitude and duration of favorable price movements or the ongoing performance of the underlying asset/entity.¹
Structure: Investments are typically based on acquiring ownership (stocks) or lending capital (bonds), linking the investor to the underlying economic value and performance of the asset or entity.¹ The market allows for potential positive-sum outcomes, where overall market value can grow due to economic activity and innovation. Investment horizons are often medium to long-term.¹⁶

D. Comparative Analysis Table

The following table summarizes the key differences across these categories:

Feature	Binary Options	Traditional Gambling (e.g., Casino, Sports Bet)	Traditional Investment (e.g., Stocks, Bonds)
Risk	Fixed, capped at premium/stake; Known upfront ¹	Amount wagered; Known upfront	Variable; Potential for partial loss or > initial investment (leverage); Manageable via tools ¹⁷
Reward	Fixed, capped payout; Known upfront ¹	Fixed odds or parimutuel; Known upfront	Variable; Potentially unlimited (stocks); Dependent on asset performance ¹
Structure	All-or-nothing; Binary outcome; Often asymmetric payout (negative expected value) ¹	Based on chance/uncertain event; House edge (negative expected value) ³²	Based on ownership/lending; Tied to underlying economic value; Potential for positive expected return ¹
Skill vs. Chance	Skill application debated, heavily constrained by short timeframes; Chance often dominates ¹²	Ranges from pure chance (roulette) to skill-influenced (poker, sports betting) ³²	Skill/analysis plays significant role, especially long-term; Market risk remains ⁴¹
Time Horizon	Predominantly very short-term (seconds to days) ¹²	Often immediate or short-term outcomes ³³	Typically medium to long-term, but short-term trading exists ¹⁶
Ownership	None ¹	None	Yes (stocks) or creditor claim (bonds) ¹
Regulation	Banned/restricted for retail in many major jurisdictions (EU, UK, AU, CA); Limited regulated US market; Large unregulated/fraudulent segment ²	Varies by jurisdiction; Generally regulated	Heavily regulated globally
Typical Outcome	Very high retail loss rates documented (74-87%+) ¹⁵	Statistically favors the house/operator	Potential for long-term gains, but losses possible

E. Structural Alignment

The comparison highlights a strong structural alignment between binary options and gambling, particularly in the risk/reward definition. The fixed, capped, and known-in-advance nature of both potential gains and losses in a single binary options transaction mirrors the structure of placing a bet with defined stakes and odds.¹ This contrasts sharply with the variable, path-dependent, and potentially compounding nature of returns and losses in traditional investments like stocks, where outcomes are not predetermined in the same discrete, binary fashion.¹

Furthermore, the combination of the zero-sum nature of binary options trading between participants ¹⁰ and the common existence of a broker advantage – either through asymmetric payouts (win < loss) or other fees ²⁰ – creates a system where the total pool of trader capital is expected to shrink over time. This mirrors the dynamics of gambling environments like casinos, where the house edge consistently extracts value from the players collectively.³² This contrasts with investment markets, which, despite volatility and individual losses, possess the capacity for aggregate value growth driven by underlying economic activity, making them potentially positive-sum over the long term.

VI. Regulatory Landscape and Classification

The way financial regulatory bodies classify and treat binary options provides significant insight into how these instruments are viewed by authorities responsible for market integrity and investor protection. A review across major economic regions reveals a strong trend towards restriction or prohibition for retail investors, often citing reasons related to their gambling-like nature and high potential for consumer harm.

A. European Union (ESMA and National Regulators)

The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) took decisive action starting in 2018, implementing temporary EU-wide measures prohibiting the marketing, distribution, and sale of binary options to retail clients.⁵⁷ These measures were justified by significant investor protection concerns, stemming from the products’ complexity, lack of transparency, inherent conflict of interest between providers and clients (where providers often profit from client losses), and documented evidence of substantial retail client losses.¹⁵ ESMA’s reviews indicated that a very high percentage of retail clients (cited as 74-87% in some reports) lost money trading these products.¹⁵ The temporary bans were renewed several times ⁵⁸ before being adopted as permanent measures or replaced by equivalent national regulations by competent authorities in member states, such as Ireland, Belgium, France, and the Netherlands.³⁷ Certain specific types of binary options, characterized by long terms (at least 90 days), the availability of a prospectus, full hedging by the provider, and structures where the investor’s capital was not at risk, were excluded from the scope of the ban.⁶⁰

B. United Kingdom (FCA)

The UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) provides a particularly clear example of regulatory classification. Historically, binary options were overseen by the UK Gambling Commission.⁵¹ Following the implementation of the EU’s MiFID II directive, regulatory responsibility shifted to the FCA.⁶² After initially adopting ESMA’s temporary measures ⁵⁹, the FCA conducted its own consultation and implemented a permanent ban on the sale, marketing, and distribution of binary options to all retail consumers, effective from April 2, 2019.⁴⁹ The FCA’s rules mirrored ESMA’s but went slightly further by also banning “securitised binary options,” a related product type, to prevent the market shifting to these close substitutes.⁴⁹

The FCA’s justification for the ban was unequivocal. It cited widespread concerns about the inherent risks, poor conduct of firms selling them leading to significant consumer harm, conflicts of interest, and the products’ complexity.⁴⁹ Crucially, the FCA explicitly stated its view, with a senior director commenting: “Binary options are gambling products dressed up as financial instruments. By confirming our ban today we are ensuring that investors don’t lose money from an inherently flawed product”.⁴⁹ The FCA estimated its ban would save UK retail consumers up to £17 million per year and reduce fraud.⁴⁹ Furthermore, the FCA warned that any firm currently offering binary options services to retail consumers in the UK is likely operating a scam.⁴⁹

C. United States (SEC & CFTC)

The US regulatory approach presents a dichotomy. Unlike the broad bans seen elsewhere, binary options can be legally traded in the US, but only on exchanges specifically designated and regulated by the SEC or CFTC, such as Nadex or through CME event futures.¹⁰ These regulated venues offer standardized contracts and operate under strict oversight designed to ensure fairness and transparency.¹³

However, both the SEC and CFTC have issued numerous strong warnings and investor alerts regarding the vast majority of binary options trading, which occurs through online platforms operating outside of US registration and regulation.¹ These platforms are often based offshore, and it is illegal for them to solicit or accept funds from US residents.⁵ The regulators highlight the extremely high risk associated with these platforms, emphasizing the prevalence of fraud, including tactics like refusing to credit accounts or process withdrawals, manipulating trading software to ensure client losses, and engaging in identity theft.¹ The CFTC maintains a “Registration Deficient List” (RED List) identifying foreign entities believed to be soliciting US residents illegally.²⁶ Both agencies have taken enforcement actions against unregistered platforms targeting US investors.²⁷ While not imposing a blanket ban like the EU or UK, the US regulators’ persistent warnings effectively portray the unregulated binary options market as a hazardous environment deeply intertwined with illegal and fraudulent activity, often drawing parallels to gambling scams.¹

D. Australia (ASIC)

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) also took a prohibitive stance. After identifying binary options as “high-risk” and “unpredictable” investments ² and conducting reviews that found approximately 80% of retail clients lost money ⁴⁸, ASIC implemented a product intervention order banning the issue and distribution of binary options to retail clients, effective May 3, 2021.² This ban was subsequently extended and is now set to last until October 1, 2031.⁴⁸ ASIC’s analysis prior to the ban revealed significant aggregate net losses for retail clients ($14 million over 13 months), reinforcing the decision to prohibit the product to protect consumers, aligning Australia’s approach with other major jurisdictions.⁴⁸

E. Other Jurisdictions

Similar restrictive actions have been taken in other countries. Canada and Israel, for instance, have also banned the sale of binary options to retail investors.¹ International bodies like the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) have noted the global nature of fraudulent binary options schemes and the massive losses incurred by investors worldwide, encouraging coordinated regulatory responses and public warnings.⁷¹

F. Regulatory Consensus and Market Reality

The actions taken by regulators in the EU, UK, Australia, Canada, and other nations represent a powerful near-global consensus. These authorities, tasked with protecting investors, have concluded that binary options, as typically offered to retail clients (especially via online platforms), pose unacceptable risks. The decisions to ban or severely restrict these products were driven by empirical evidence of widespread consumer harm, the products’ inherent structural flaws (complexity, conflicts of interest, negative expected value), and their strong association with fraudulent practices. This collective regulatory judgment implicitly classifies binary options as being too dangerous, too speculative, and too akin to harmful gambling to be permitted for retail sale.

The US situation underscores a critical dichotomy. While the existence of a regulated market segment acknowledges that binary options can function as financial instruments under strict rules ²⁶, the overwhelming focus of regulatory warnings is on the unregulated segment.⁵ This suggests that the predominant experience for individuals encountering binary options online is likely within a space that regulators view not just as high-risk trading, but as a domain rife with illegality and scams designed to defraud investors.² This reality shapes the overall perception and risk associated with binary options far more than the small, compliant niche market.

VII. Perspectives from Experts and Consumer Protection Agencies

Beyond regulatory actions, the views of financial market experts, analysts, and consumer protection bodies provide further context for evaluating binary options.

A. Financial Experts and Analysts

Commentary from financial experts and market analysts frequently draws parallels between binary options and gambling. The all-or-nothing payout structure, the emphasis on short-term price movements, and the inherent high risk lead many to characterize binary options as wagers or bets rather than conventional investments.¹ Investopedia, a financial education resource, notes that critics warn these trades are “more akin to gambling than investing” ¹ and that currency binary options are “often considered to be a form of online gambling on currency markets”.¹² Bankrate describes them as “closer to gambling than to investing”.¹⁶

Experts also highlight the purely speculative nature of binary options, divorced from underlying asset ownership or long-term value considerations.¹ The difficulty of achieving consistent profitability is another common theme, stemming from the unfavorable payout structures that necessitate win rates substantially exceeding 50% to overcome the inherent disadvantage.¹² While some acknowledge that disciplined approaches involving analysis and risk management might differentiate “trading” from “gambling” within the binary options sphere ³⁷, the overall sentiment often emphasizes the gambling-like characteristics, especially for short-term contracts.³⁷

B. Regulatory Agencies

As detailed in the previous section, regulatory bodies like the SEC, CFTC, and FCA consistently issue strong warnings about the dangers of binary options, particularly those offered by unregulated offshore platforms.¹ Their communications emphasize the high risk of losing the entire investment and the pervasive nature of fraud.² The types of fraud frequently cited – refusal to pay out winnings, manipulation of trading software to generate losses, identity theft – paint a picture of predatory practices.⁵ The FBI’s involvement and estimation of $10 billion in annual global losses due to binary options scams underscore the scale and severity of the problem.²

Furthermore, some regulators explicitly use gambling terminology in their assessments. The FCA’s description of them as “gambling products dressed up as financial instruments” ⁴⁹ and the Central Bank of Ireland’s view that they are “no more an investment than betting on a horse” ⁵⁶ reflect a clear classification based on their perceived function and risk profile. Lori Schock, former director of the SEC’s Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, warned that “All-or-nothing investments involve a high degree of risk, and many binary options promotions online are frauds”.¹⁰

C. Consumer Protection Bodies/Advocates

Consumer protection agencies and advocacy groups echo these concerns, focusing on the vulnerability of retail investors. They issue warnings about widespread scams, particularly those operated by unlicensed, offshore entities.²⁷ A key point of concern is the lack of recourse for victims; recovering funds lost to fraudulent brokers operating outside regulatory reach is often impossible.²⁷ These groups also highlight the misleading marketing tactics employed, which often promise unrealistic returns, low risk, and easy money, luring unsuspecting individuals into potentially harmful situations.²² The lack of adequate consumer protection within the largely unregulated online binary options space is a recurring theme.²⁷

D. Convergence of Perspectives and Implications

There is a notable convergence in the perspectives of these diverse groups. Financial analysts point to the structural similarities with betting; regulators focus on the documented harm, fraud, and regulatory breaches, often using gambling analogies; and consumer advocates highlight the practical dangers of scams and lack of protection. This multi-faceted consensus paints a compelling picture: binary options, especially in their common online, unregulated form, are widely viewed across the financial and consumer protection landscape as exceptionally risky, structurally problematic, frequently associated with fraud, and bearing strong resemblances to gambling.

The sheer scale and sophistication of the fraud reported in the binary options space raise further questions. Tactics like deliberately manipulating software to ensure client losses ⁵ or systematically denying withdrawals ⁵ move beyond the realm of offering a product with unfavorable odds (like legitimate gambling) into the territory of outright criminal theft operating under the guise of a financial product. This suggests that a significant segment of the industry may not even qualify as offering a “fair gamble,” but rather functions as a mechanism for fraud, further complicating any attempt to classify it solely as legitimate trading or even legitimate gambling.

VIII. Outcomes for Retail Traders

Examining the documented outcomes for retail individuals participating in binary options trading provides crucial empirical evidence for evaluating the nature of this activity. Data collected by regulators and researchers consistently points towards extremely poor results for the vast majority of retail participants.

A. Reported Loss Rates

Multiple regulatory bodies, prior to implementing bans or restrictions, conducted investigations into retail client outcomes in binary options trading. The findings were remarkably consistent and alarming:

European Union: Reviews across EU member states revealed that between 74% and 87% of retail clients incurred losses when trading binary options.¹⁵
Australia (ASIC): Reviews conducted in 2017 and 2019 found that approximately 80% of retail clients lost money.⁴⁸ In the 13 months leading up to ASIC’s ban in May 2021, data from licensed issuers showed that 74–77% of active retail clients lost money.⁴⁸
Ireland: A Central Bank of Ireland inspection found 75% of retail CFD clients (a related complex product) made losses, with a later review finding 74% lost money over a two-year period.⁵⁶ While specific to CFDs in this instance, it reflects the general trend in high-risk retail derivatives.
General Estimates: Broader estimates covering retail trading in complex derivatives like CFDs, Forex, and potentially binary options suggest loss rates typically range from 70% to 90%, with some sources suggesting loss rates for binary options could exceed 85%.⁷⁷

These figures indicate that losing money is not an occasional outcome but the typical experience for the overwhelming majority of retail individuals trading binary options.

B. Financial Impact

The high loss rates translate into significant financial detriment for retail clients, both individually and in aggregate:

Aggregate Losses: ASIC’s data revealed that in the 13 months before its ban, Australian retail client accounts trading binary options suffered aggregate net losses of AU$14 million. This figure resulted from loss-making accounts losing a total of AU$15.7 million, while profit-making accounts generated only AU$1.7 million in profits.⁴⁸ This stark imbalance highlights the overall negative outcome for the retail segment.
Average Losses: Reports indicate substantial average losses per client. The Central Bank of Ireland cited average losses for CFD traders (a comparable group) ranging from €2,700 to €6,900 in different review periods.⁵⁶ One investigation cited by The Bureau of Investigative Journalism suggested an average loss of £20,000 for UK victims of binary options scams.⁵¹
Severe Personal Impact: Numerous accounts detail victims losing life savings, retirement funds, or significant sums of money through binary options trading, particularly via fraudulent platforms.⁵¹

C. Reasons for Poor Outcomes

Several factors contribute to these consistently poor outcomes for retail traders:

Inherent Product Structure: As previously discussed, the common asymmetric payout structure (where potential percentage gain is less than the 100% loss) requires traders to achieve a win rate significantly above 50% (often estimated between 57% and 60% or higher) just to break even.¹² Achieving such consistency is extremely difficult, especially given the role of chance. Model calculations show that the probability of suffering a total loss increases dramatically as the number of trades grows; one model indicated a 99.48% probability of total loss after 1,000 trades under typical payout conditions.¹⁵ This creates a strong statistical headwind against profitability.
Difficulty of Short-Term Prediction: The prevalence of very short expiry times makes accurate prediction extremely challenging due to market noise and randomness.¹²
Behavioral Factors: Retail traders are susceptible to emotional decision-making, such as fear and greed, chasing losses (trying to win back lost money by betting more), and lack of discipline, all of which can lead to poor trading outcomes.¹⁴ The rapid-fire nature of short-term binary options may exacerbate these tendencies.⁴³
Broker Practices and Fraud: On many unregulated platforms, brokers act as the counterparty to client trades, meaning they directly profit from client losses.²⁰ This creates a fundamental conflict of interest. Beyond this, outright fraud, including manipulating prices or platforms to ensure client losses and refusing payouts, is rampant in the unregulated sector.⁵

D. Outcomes as Evidence

The consistently documented, extremely high loss rates across multiple jurisdictions serve as powerful empirical evidence. These are not mere anecdotes but statistically significant outcomes observed by regulatory authorities.¹⁵ Importantly, these findings were often the direct catalyst for regulatory interventions, including the widespread bans on retail binary options trading.¹⁵ This establishes a clear link between the observed negative reality for retail participants and the regulatory conclusion that the product is too harmful for this segment.

Furthermore, the mathematical structure itself provides a compelling explanation for these poor outcomes. The requirement for a high win rate to simply break even, due to payouts typically being less than 100% of the amount risked ¹², creates a systemic disadvantage for the trader. This mirrors the operational principle of the house edge in casino games. Even in the hypothetical absence of fraud or broker manipulation, the inherent mathematics of the product, as commonly offered, statistically stacks the odds against the retail trader achieving long-term profitability.

IX. Synthesis: Evaluating Binary Options as Gambling

Synthesizing the findings from the preceding sections allows for a comprehensive evaluation of whether binary options trading aligns with the definition and characteristics of gambling.

A. Alignment with Gambling Definition

Binary options trading exhibits strong alignment with the core elements defining gambling:

Risking Value: Traders unequivocally risk money (the option premium or stake).²⁹
Uncertain Outcome: The future price movement of the underlying asset relative to the strike price is inherently uncertain.²⁹
Chance Element: As analyzed, chance plays a significant, often dominant, role, particularly due to the prevalent short timeframes which limit the reliable efficacy of skill-based analysis.²
Hope of Gain: The motivation for trading is to achieve the predetermined payout if the prediction is correct.³⁰

B. Key Gambling Characteristics Present

Beyond the basic definition, binary options share several key characteristics commonly associated with gambling activities:

All-or-Nothing Payout: The discrete, binary win/loss outcome mirrors the structure of many simple bets.¹
Negative Expected Value: The frequent use of asymmetric payouts (win < 100% vs. loss = 100%) structurally creates a negative expected value for the trader, akin to a “house edge” favoring the broker or platform.²
Short Time Horizon & Excitement: The emphasis on rapid expiry times and frequent trading opportunities caters to a desire for immediate results and potential excitement or “rush,” similar to some forms of gambling.¹²
Broker as Counterparty: In many cases, particularly on unregulated platforms, the broker takes the opposite side of the client’s trade and profits directly from client losses, functioning similarly to a casino or bookmaker taking bets against players.²⁰

C. Contrasts with Traditional Investment

Compared to traditional financial investments like stocks or bonds, binary options exhibit stark differences:

Lack of Ownership/Economic Utility: They represent pure price speculation without conferring ownership rights or contributing directly to capital formation.¹
Risk/Reward Structure: The fixed, capped, all-or-nothing risk/reward profile contrasts with the variable, potentially unlimited (or substantial), and path-dependent returns of traditional investments.
Time Horizon: Binary options are predominantly very short-term instruments, unlike the typically longer horizons associated with investing.
Expected Value: Binary options often feature a structurally negative expected value for the retail trader, whereas traditional investments offer the potential for positive long-term returns based on economic fundamentals.

D. Role of Regulation and Fraud

The regulatory response provides strong contextual evidence. The widespread bans and restrictions imposed by major financial authorities (EU, UK, Australia, Canada) were explicitly based on assessments of extreme risk, high consumer losses, product flaws, and comparisons to gambling.¹⁵ This regulatory consensus reflects a judgment that these products, particularly for retail clients, fall outside the bounds of acceptable investment activity and align more closely with activities requiring prohibition or heavy restriction due to potential harm.

Furthermore, the pervasive issue of fraud within the largely unregulated online binary options market complicates the picture.² Many platforms appear to operate not as legitimate trading or even fair gambling venues, but as outright scams designed to steal client funds through manipulation and deceit. This criminal element further distances much of the binary options activity from the concept of legitimate financial trading.

E. Overall Assessment

While proponents may argue for the role of skill through market analysis and strategy, the collective weight of evidence points strongly towards classifying binary options trading, especially as commonly practiced by retail clients on online platforms, as a form of gambling. The combination of a binary payout structure mimicking a bet, extremely short timeframes that amplify randomness and hinder effective analysis, documented high loss rates confirming poor outcomes, a frequently negative expected value due to asymmetric payouts (the “house edge”), and the common role of the broker as a direct counterparty profiting from losses, creates an ecosystem whose dominant characteristics align far more closely with high-risk, short-odds betting than with traditional financial investment.

The regulatory actions across the globe are not merely abstract classifications but direct responses to the observed reality of widespread consumer harm intrinsically linked to the product’s structure and the often predatory manner in which it is marketed and sold online. This makes the near-global regulatory prohibition or restriction itself a significant piece of evidence supporting the view that binary options function primarily as a harmful, gambling-like activity for retail participants. Even if a theoretical element of skill exists, the structural features of the product and the environment in which it is typically traded appear to render that skill insufficient to consistently overcome the inherent disadvantages and the dominant influence of chance.

X. Conclusion

A. Summary of Findings

This report has conducted a detailed analysis to evaluate whether binary options trading constitutes gambling. The key findings indicate that binary options possess numerous characteristics strongly aligning them with gambling:

Mechanics: They are structured as yes/no propositions on short-term asset price movements with an all-or-nothing payout, mirroring the fixed-odds, binary outcome nature of many bets.
Skill vs. Chance: While analytical techniques can be applied, their effectiveness is highly questionable, particularly given the extremely short expiry times common in binary options, which tend to amplify the role of random market noise over predictable trends. Chance appears to be a dominant factor in determining outcomes for most retail participants.
Risk/Reward: The risk and reward are fixed and known upfront, similar to placing a wager. Critically, the payout structure on many platforms is asymmetric (potential gain < potential loss), creating a negative expected value for the trader, analogous to the house edge in casino games.
Trader Outcomes: Empirical data from multiple regulatory bodies consistently shows extremely high loss rates (typically 74-87% or higher) among retail clients trading binary options, resulting in significant aggregate financial harm.
Regulatory Treatment: Financial regulators in major jurisdictions (EU, UK, Australia, Canada) have largely banned or severely restricted the sale of binary options to retail clients, explicitly citing their high risks, gambling-like characteristics, potential for fraud, and documented consumer losses.
Expert Opinion: Financial experts and consumer protection agencies frequently compare binary options to gambling, highlighting their speculative nature and the prevalence of scams, particularly within the unregulated online market.
Fraud: The binary options market, especially the segment operating via unregulated offshore platforms, is plagued by widespread fraudulent activity, including manipulation of platforms and refusal to return client funds, often moving beyond risky gambling into outright criminal operations.

B. Final Assessment

Based on a comprehensive evaluation of their operational mechanics, risk/reward structure, the limited efficacy of skill versus the significant role of chance, the documented adverse outcomes for retail participants, and the prohibitive stance taken by most major financial regulators globally, the conclusion is compelling: Binary options trading, particularly as offered through online platforms to retail clients, functions predominantly as a form of gambling rather than a legitimate financial investment.

While traded in the context of financial markets, the core elements – risking capital on an uncertain short-term event with a binary outcome, often against unfavorable odds (negative expected value), and without acquiring ownership of an underlying asset – align squarely with the fundamental definition and characteristics of gambling. The element of skill, though present in theory, appears insufficient to consistently overcome the structural disadvantages and the inherent randomness amplified by short time horizons. The widespread regulatory bans and the explicit comparisons to gambling by authorities like the FCA further solidify this assessment. The high prevalence of fraud in the unregulated sector serves only to compound the risks, often transforming a high-risk gamble into a near-certain loss for unsuspecting individuals. Therefore, for the retail participant, engaging with binary options, especially outside the few strictly regulated exchanges, carries risks and characteristics far more analogous to high-stakes betting than to prudent financial market activity.

Download PDF

Works cited

Binary Option: Definition, How They Trade, and Example – Investopedia, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/binary-option.asp
Binary option – Wikipedia, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_option
www.investopedia.com, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.investopedia.com/articles/active-trading/052014/binary-options-strategies.asp#:~:text=8-,Understanding%20Binary%20Options,they%20are%20short%2Dterm%20trades.
The Most Important Technical Indicators for Binary Options – Investopedia, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.investopedia.com/articles/active-trading/022615/most-important-technical-indicators-binary-options.asp
Investor Alert: Binary options and Fraud – SEC.gov, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.sec.gov/investor/alerts/ia_binary.pdf
CFTC/SEC Investor Alert: Binary Options and Fraud, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.cftc.gov/LearnAndProtect/AdvisoriesAndArticles/fraudadv_binaryoptions.html
A Beginner’s Guide to Binary Options Trading – TIOmarkets, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://tiomarkets.com/en/article/a-beginner-s-guide-to-binary-options-trading
How to Hedge Stock Positions Using Binary Options – Investopedia, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.investopedia.com/articles/active-trading/073015/how-hedge-stock-positions-using-binary-options.asp
Binary Options Strategies You Should Know – Investopedia, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.investopedia.com/articles/active-trading/052014/binary-options-strategies.asp
A Guide to Trading Binary Options in the US – Investopedia, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.investopedia.com/articles/active-trading/061114/guide-trading-binary-options-us.asp
Introduction to Binary Options Trading – NerdWallet, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/investing/binary-options-trading
Currency Binary: What It is, How it Works, Examples – Investopedia, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/currency-binary.asp
Trading Forex With Binary Options – Investopedia, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.investopedia.com/articles/forex/022415/trading-forex-binary-options.asp
A Test of Market Efficiency: A Supervised Machine Learning Approach to Binary Options Trading – Preprints.org, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.preprints.org/frontend/manuscript/ac3babb42868f7baf8ea283e994bcbd3/download_pub
Binary options trading remains possible only for professional investors, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.cnb.cz/en/cnb-news/press-releases/Binary-options-trading-remains-possible-only-for-professional-investors
What Are Binary Options? The Key Risks And Rewards – Bankrate, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.bankrate.com/investing/what-are-binary-options/
Is Options Trading Gambling? Why or Why Not – SoFi, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.sofi.com/learn/content/is-options-trading-gambling/
What Are Binary Options? How They Work, Types, and Risks – Quadcode, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://quadcode.com/glossary/what-are-binary-options
Risks vs Return with Binary Option Trading – Theseus, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.theseus.fi/bitstream/10024/120432/2/Kiiskinen_Eemi.pdf
What Are Binary Options: Definition, How Do They Work, and Example | LiteFinance, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.litefinance.org/blog/for-beginners/what-are-binary-options/
Top Binary Options Trading Strategies | Dukascopy Bank SA, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.dukascopy.com/swiss/english/marketwatch/articles/binary-options-trading-strategy/
Binary Options Fraud | Investor.gov, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.investor.gov/protect-your-investments/fraud/types-fraud/binary-options-fraud
What Makes You Such a Good Binary Options Trader? – Finance Magnates, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.financemagnates.com/binary-options/analysis/what-makes-you-such-a-good-binary-options-trader/
Binary Options When Investment Becomes Gambling – Shariyah Review Bureau, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://shariyah.net/binary-options-when-investment-becomes-gambling/
Mastering Binary Options: Types, Strategies, and Risks – Quadcode, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://quadcode.com/blog/mastering-binary-options-types-strategies-and-risks
Binary Options Fraud – FBI, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/binary-options-fraud
Binary Options Trading Litigation Team – Giambrone, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.giambronelaw.com/site/servicesforindividuals/binary-trading-litigation/english/
Binary Options – Overview, Guides & Online Trading – MarketReview, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.marketreview.com/binary-options/
Gambling – World Health Organization (WHO), accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/gambling
Defining problem gambling – Mass.gov, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.mass.gov/info-details/defining-problem-gambling
What is Gambling Disorder? – American Psychiatric Association, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.psychiatry.org/patients-families/gambling-disorder/what-is-gambling-disorder
Gambling Concepts and Nomenclature – NCBI, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK230627/
Gambling – Wikipedia, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambling
What is Considered Gambling?, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://thegamblingclinic.com/what-is-considered-gambling/
Gambling | Definition, History, Games, & Facts | Britannica, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/topic/gambling
How gambling affects the brain and who is most vulnerable to addiction, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.apa.org/monitor/2023/07/how-gambling-affects-the-brain
Binary options: Gambling or Trading? – Earn, Save, Invest, Grow!, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.bidenko.net/binary-options-gambling-or-trading
The use of Contracts for difference (‘CFD’) Spread Bets and Binary Options (‘forbin’) to Trade Foreign Exchange (‘forex’) Commodities and Stocks and Shares in Volatile Financial Markets – Herald Scholarly Open Access, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.heraldopenaccess.us/openaccess/the-use-of-contracts-for-difference-cfd-spread-bets-and-binary-options-forbin-to-trade-foreign-exchange-forex-commodities-and-stocks-and-shares-in-volatile-financial-markets
Compulsive gambling – Symptoms & causes – Mayo Clinic, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/compulsive-gambling/symptoms-causes/syc-20355178
FAQs: What is Problem Gambling?, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.ncpgambling.org/help-treatment/faqs-what-is-problem-gambling/
Is Options Trading Gambling? | A Data-Backed Exploration – OptionsTrading.org, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.optionstrading.org/blog/is-options-trading-gambling/
Binary Options Investing vs. Gambling: What is the Difference?, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://binarytradingclub.com/binary-options-investing-gambling/
Get Ahead in Binary Trading: Proven Tactics for Quick Gains – CyberPanel, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://cyberpanel.net/blog/get-ahead-in-binary-trading-proven-tactics-for-quick-gains
A guide to a comprehensive binary options course – AZ Big Media, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://azbigmedia.com/business/a-guide-to-a-comprehensive-binary-options-course/
Choosing the Best Binary Options Trading Strategy for Your Style and Goals – BlueNotary, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://bluenotary.us/choosing-the-best-binary-options-trading-strategy-for-your-style-and-goals/
Building a Career in Binary Options Trading: An Essential Guide – Opportunity Desk, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://opportunitydesk.org/2024/08/06/building-a-career-in-binary-options-trading-an-essential-guide/
I Tried Trading Binary Options for 24 Hours – YouTube, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0Rg2eT2y_4
22-243MR ASIC’s binary options ban extended until 2031, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://asic.gov.au/about-asic/news-centre/find-a-media-release/2022-releases/22-243mr-asic-s-binary-options-ban-extended-until-2031/
FCA confirms permanent ban on the sale of binary options to retail consumers, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.fca.org.uk/news/statements/fca-confirms-permanent-ban-sale-binary-options-retail-consumers
FCA Introduces Permanent Ban on Binary Options to Retail Consumers – objectivus, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://objectivus.com/fca-introduces-permanent-ban-on-binary-options-to-retail-consumers/
What are binary options? | TBIJ, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/explainers/what-are-binary-options
A Losing Bet: Binary Options – Canadian Securities Administrators, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.securities-administrators.ca/uploadedFiles/General/pdfs/CSA_BinaryOptionsFraud_EN_2017.pdf
Binary Betting – How Binaries Work – Independent Investor, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.independentinvestor.com/spread-betting/binary-betting/
UK FCA Charges Four Individuals with £1.2M Binary Options Fraud – Finance Magnates, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.financemagnates.com/binary-options/uk-fca-charges-four-persons-in-12m-binary-options-fraud/
Stock Market Vs. Sports Betting – Comparison Guide – RG.org., accessed on April 19, 2025, https://rg.org/guides/comparison/stock-market-vs-sports-betting
Central Bank of Ireland bans sale of binary options and restricts sale of contracts for difference, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.centralbank.ie/news/article/central-bank-bans-sale-binary-options-restricts-sale-contracts-for-difference
The Central Bank, Binary Options and CFDs, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.mccannfitzgerald.com/knowledge/financial-services-regulation/the-central-bank-binary-options-and-cfds
ESMA renews binary options prohibition for a further three months from 2 April 2019, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.esma.europa.eu/press-news/esma-news/esma-renews-binary-options-prohibition-further-three-months-2-april-2019
FCA statement on onshoring ESMA’s temporary intervention measures on retail CFD and binary options products, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.fca.org.uk/news/statements/onshoring-esma-temporary-intervention-measures-retail-cfd-binary-options
ESMA to renew prohibition on binary options for a further three months – European Union, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.esma.europa.eu/press-news/esma-news/esma-renew-prohibition-binary-options-further-three-months
ESMA decision to renew ban on marketing, distribution or sale of binary options enters into force | Global Regulation Tomorrow, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.regulationtomorrow.com/eu/esma-decision-to-renew-ban-on-marketing-distribution-or-sale-of-binary-options-enters-into-force/
Product intervention measures for retail binary options Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) RPC rating: validated – GOV.UK, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5d1df9c340f0b609f39009e5/RPC-4371_1_-HMT-FCA_-_product_intervention_measures_for_retail_binary_options_-_IA_f__opinion.pdf
Compliance Corner: UK Bans Binary Options For Retail Investors – Family Wealth Report, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.familywealthreport.com/article.php/Compliance-Corner:-UK-Bans-Binary-Options-For-Retail-Investors-
Updated: CFTC Grants No-Action Relief for Certain Binary Option Transactions – Westlaw, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://content.next.westlaw.com/practical-law/document/I1a77f71fadbb11ebbea4f0dc9fb69570/Updated-CFTC-Grants-No-Action-Relief-for-Certain-Binary-Option-Transactions?viewType=FullText&transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)
Avoid Unregistered Binary Options Trading Platforms | CFTC, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.cftc.gov/LearnAndProtect/AdvisoriesAndArticles/avoid_unregistered_binary_options_platforms.htm
Binary Options Fraud | CFTC, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.cftc.gov/BinaryOptionsFraud/index.htm
SEC Warns Investors About Binary Options and Charges Cyprus-Based Company with Selling Them Illegally in U.S., accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2013-2013-103htm
Beware of Binary Options Mobile Apps | CFTC, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.cftc.gov/LearnAndProtect/AdvisoriesAndArticles/beware_of_binary_options_mobile.htm
CFTC Orders Event-Based Binary Options Markets Operator to Pay $1.4 Million Penalty, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/8478-22
US CFTC Takes Action Against Unregistered Crypto and Binary Options Platforms, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://charltonsquantum.com/us-cftc-takes-action-against-unregistered-crypto-and-binary-options-platforms/
Statement on Concerns Related to Binary Options, accessed on April 19, 2025, http://www.csrc.gov.cn/csrc/c100220/c1003110/1003110/files/1631593297339_49319.pdf
ASIC Extends Binary Options Ban until October 2031 – Finance Magnates, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.financemagnates.com/binary-options/regulation/asic-extends-binary-options-ban-until-october-2031/
ASIC extends binary options ban – Money Management, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.moneymanagement.com.au/news/policy-regulation/asic-extends-binary-options-ban
Australian regulator extends binary options ban to 2031 | Investment Executive, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.investmentexecutive.com/news/from-the-regulators/australian-regulator-extends-binary-options-ban-to-2031/
ASIC’s binary options ban extended until 2031 – Consumers’ Federation of Australia, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://consumersfederation.org.au/asics-binary-options-ban-extended-until-2031/
Binary options scams warning – Gambling Commission, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/news/article/binary-options-scams-warning
Percentage of Traders Losing Money Revealed – MarketBulls, accessed on April 19, 2025, https://market-bulls.com/what-percent-of-traders-lose-money/