Who carries out integrity monitoring?

Monitoring is carried out by operators' own trading and risk teams, by industry bodies that pool alerts across members, such as the International Betting Integrity Association, and by specialist suppliers that sell monitoring as a service to sports bodies and regulators. The monitors do not hold disciplinary or investigative powers; they pass evidence to the governing bodies and authorities that do.

What are the limits of integrity monitoring?

Monitoring only sees the markets it has access to. Betting moved to unlicensed sites, illegal bookmakers or venues outside the monitoring network is invisible, and a thinly traded market can be moved without triggering an alert at all. That blind spot is the main argument for making participation compulsory and for sharing data across as many operators and jurisdictions as possible.

Compliance

Integrity Monitoring

Reviewed by iGaming Times editorial teamLast reviewed 24 September 2026

What is Integrity Monitoring?

Systematic surveillance of betting markets for patterns suggesting corruption, such as unusual price movement, atypical stake sizes or accounts consistently positioned ahead of events.

Key takeaways

Integrity monitoring looks for the betting activity a fix is designed to profit from, not the misconduct on the field.
Several jurisdictions make participation in a monitoring arrangement and suspicious-activity reporting a licence condition.
Monitoring only sees the markets it can reach, so activity on unlicensed books can go undetected.

Why it matters

Integrity monitoring works from the betting side rather than the sporting side. Rather than trying to observe misconduct on the field, it looks for the betting behaviour that misconduct is designed to profit from, on the theory that a fix which is never bet on has no purpose. Alerts are escalated to governing bodies and regulators, who hold the disciplinary and investigative powers the monitors do not.

Several jurisdictions now require licensees to participate in a monitoring arrangement and to report suspicious activity, which turns a voluntary practice into a licence condition. Suppliers sell it as a service, and venues in contested categories have adopted it partly to demonstrate seriousness to regulators.

The method has a structural blind spot. Monitoring sees the markets it has access to, so activity moved to unlicensed books or to venues outside the network is invisible, and a market with narrow participation can be moved without generating an alert at all.

The bottom line

Integrity monitoring catches corruption by watching the money rather than the match. It sees only the markets it can reach, which is the argument for making participation compulsory.