P2P betting versus a bookmaker
By Fleur Dijkstra · Sports Data Editor
What p2p betting changes compared with a bookmaker
P2P betting removes the bookmaker as the counterparty to a bet. Instead of wagering against a company that sets odds and holds the money, participants bet against each other. The platform provides matching, settlement, and dispute resolution, but it does not take the opposite side of the trade.
A traditional bookmaker earns by building a margin into the odds. That margin is invisible to most bettors, but it reduces the payout on every outcome. In p2p betting, the platform may charge a fee or take a cut of winnings, but the odds themselves come from what other participants are willing to accept. Whether that produces better prices depends on the market and the moment.
The same ground from another side: How crypto prediction markets work and Odds on price targets.
Where the risk moves in a peer-to-peer market
With a bookmaker, the main risks are clear: the bet loses, the account gets limited, or the operator delays a withdrawal. In p2p betting, those risks do not disappear, but they shift.
The counterparty becomes another user. If that user does not pay, the platform must enforce the settlement. If the platform’s enforcement is weak, the bet is worth less than it looks. Liquidity is also not guaranteed. A bookmaker will usually quote a price on a standard market. On a p2p venue, there may be no one willing to take the other side at an acceptable price, especially outside major events.
Odds can move differently too. A bookmaker adjusts prices based on its own liability. A p2p market moves only when participants place orders or accept existing ones. Thin markets can show prices that do not reflect the true probability of an outcome.
Anonymity changes the trust model
Some p2p betting platforms allow anonymous entry through Web3 wallets, without KYC. Dexsport lists that approach in its JAN proposal: no identity verification, with access through a connected wallet. That lowers the barrier to entry. It also removes the usual ways a platform can enforce rules against a specific person.
When a user is identified only by a wallet address, disputes depend on smart contracts, escrow, or the platform’s own arbitration. A licensed operator can still apply its rules to the wallet. Dexsport operates under an Anjouan licence through Dexapp LTD. That gives the platform a legal form, but it does not make an anonymous counterparty easier to pursue if something goes wrong.
What a licence does and does not cover
A licence tells you that a company exists and that a regulator has accepted it under some framework. It does not guarantee that every market is fair or that every counterparty will pay. In p2p betting, the platform may be licensed while the users taking the opposite side are not.
Dexsport’s proposal mentions support for more than 85 coins across more than 20 blockchains. That breadth is a technical fact about deposits and settlements. It says nothing about the quality of the odds or the reliability of any individual counterparty. A wide choice of settlement assets can be convenient, but it also means users must judge value in different units and across different fee environments.
If this changes what you plan to do, check the platform's own conditions first — they vary far more than the rules do.
Go and see DexsportComparing the two models directly
| Aspect | Traditional bookmaker | P2P betting |
|---|---|---|
| Counterparty | The operator | Another user |
| Odds source | Set by the bookmaker with a margin | Set by participants in the market |
| Liquidity | Usually available on standard markets | Depends on who is currently active |
| Account access | Typically requires identity verification | May allow anonymous Web3 wallet entry |
| Dispute resolution | Operator decides, subject to regulation | Platform arbitration or smart contracts |
| Main hidden risk | Margin and account restrictions | Counterparty default and thin markets |
The table is a simplification. Individual platforms differ, and a p2p venue with a licence may behave more like a bookmaker in some areas. The key difference remains: in one model you bet against a company, in the other you bet against people, with the platform standing somewhere in between.
Answers in brief
Who is my actual counterparty if I place a bet on a p2p betting platform instead of with a bookmaker?
Instead of betting against a company that sets odds and holds the money, you bet against another user. The platform provides matching, settlement, and dispute resolution, but it does not take the opposite side of the trade.
Is liquidity always available on a p2p betting market?
No. On a p2p venue, there may be no one willing to take the other side at an acceptable price, especially outside major events. A bookmaker will usually quote a price on a standard market.
Can I enter a p2p betting platform anonymously from the Netherlands?
Some p2p betting platforms allow anonymous entry through Web3 wallets, without KYC. Dexsport lists that approach in its JAN proposal: no identity verification, with access through a connected wallet.
Does a platform licence guarantee that my counterparty will pay in p2p betting?
No. A licence tells you that a company exists and that a regulator has accepted it under some framework, but it does not guarantee that every counterparty will pay. In p2p betting, the platform may be licensed while the users taking the opposite side are not.
What is the main hidden risk in p2p betting compared with a traditional bookmaker?
In p2p betting, the main hidden risks are counterparty default and thin markets, while with a bookmaker the hidden risks are margin and account restrictions. If another user does not pay, the platform must enforce the settlement, and if its enforcement is weak, the bet is worth less than it looks.