[ekjhgkejhgk]

If you want to bet, you could do so in regulated markets like financial markets.

This isn't a smartass remark "stock market is gambling". I literally mean that the financial markets went through all this bullshit 100 years ago, and came up with rules to make them fairer. For example, you won't be blocked from the stock market just because you do really well.

[jbstack]

It's a bad analogy because the incentives are totally different. With sports betting (of the type in the article) you're betting against the bookmaker. If you win, they lose, and vice versa. Obviously it's better for them that you lose.

With financial markets you are betting against other users. The ones running the market take fees on each transaction, so they don't care whether you win or lose. Their incentive is just to keep you making transactions.

[wbshaw]

I always understood bookmaking as the house making money on the vig. They don't care who wins or loses. They just want to make sure there's an equal number and they take their percentage off the top of all the bets. Too many people betting the over? Move the line.

[pama]

The article explains that there are other betting systems/organizations where you bet against the house, especially in early times of a new type of bet, before there is market information. These organizations try to eliminate/reduce the power of intelligent players. In financial markets the function of the house is done by market makers. You could technically burn down a market maker with superior intellect and a deep bankroll, but they generally have very deep pockets and make money at a fast rate to weather the storms.

[quickthrowman]

A book maker and market maker offer the same service: liquidity. The only difference is the market they offer liquidity in.

[ekjhgkejhgk]

> With financial markets you are betting against other users.

Learn what a "broker" is.

[mr_mitm]

Neo brokers offering highly leveraged index funds securities with very low trading fees and convenient mobile apps are absolutely indiscernible from gambling. Some people bet on the NASDAQ like other people bet on race horses. It might be even worse, because how can you stop people from trading securities?

[Youden]

> Neo brokers offering highly leveraged index funds securities

These, eToro and the like, aren't "brokers" so much as online betting platforms for the stock market.

A typical broker like Interactive Brokers, Charles Schwab etc. acts as a gateway to the market, other traders act as counterparties, and is bound by strict regulation

These "neo brokers" as you call them don't. Those "securities" you're buying are offered by the broker, at a price set by the broker, the broker may be the counterparty and they can't be transferred. Just like a casino.

This is all laid out in the terms and conditions for anybody who cares to read them, e.g. [0], sections 7.1 and 17.

If you want to gamble based on stock prices using leverage, at least do it right: use derivatives. They're leveraged but thoroughly regulated and traded on central exchanges.

[0]: https://www.etoro.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/eToro-EU-Te...

[mr_mitm]

I was thinking of platforms like Trade Republic, and it's my understanding that they are backed by a licensed bank and what you trade are indeed regulated derivatives. Have I been misinformed?

[Youden]

Hadn't heard of that one, I don't immediately see anything that makes it seem as dodgy as eToro. Do you have a link to any of these highly-leveraged securities they're trading?

[mr_mitm]

This is a 73000x security on silver: https://www.ls-tc.de/en/turbo/4244036

It's got an ISIN and all that.

L+S is the exchange where Trade Republic trades: https://support.traderepublic.com/en-nl/705-On-which-trading...

[Youden]

Ah, I see. That's indeed completely separate from what I was talking about. I didn't know such securities/exchanges existed.

[integralid]

Stock market is not gambling, but you can definitely gamble on the stock market. Considering it's a zero sum game (instead of negative sum, like in casino) and it's taxed favorably I have no idea why anyone still does sports betting.

[ekjhgkejhgk]

> Stock market is not gambling

I don't like picking on definitions, because then we start discussing the definitions instead of the underlying points. But if you're going to make such definitive statements, then I have to reply with "depends on your definition of gambling".

> gambling: the practice or activity of betting : the practice of risking money or other stakes in a game or bet

[pama]

The financial markets are only near-zero sum at the level of large finanical institutions. For everyone else there is a cost per transaction (either a direct fee or your info gets shared with a favored sharkpool first). Limit orders give away information and market orders pay the spread between buy and sell. Not exactly zero sum at a technical level, but definitely much closer to it than casinos.

[ekjhgkejhgk]

Financial markets are positive-sum if you measure utility rather than cash. The person you were responding to is just generating garbage.

[pama]

Agreed on utility