Norway enforces one of Europe’s most restrictive gambling frameworks. Payment blocking, DNS actions, advertising bans, and legal pressure on international operators form part of a strategy designed to protect state monopolies Norsk Tipping and Norsk Rikstoto. However, the Government Pension Fund Global (GPFG), commonly known as the Oil Fund, holds substantial investments in some of the world’s largest gambling and iGaming companies.
As of June 30, 2025, the GPFG was valued at $1.94 trillion. A review of the fund’s complete holdings reveals Norway maintains financial ties to an industry it actively restricts domestically.
Complete Overview of Oil Fund’s iGaming and Gambling Investments
The Oil Fund’s gambling sector investments total $3.25 billion across 21 companies, representing 0.167% of the fund’s total value. This translates to approximately one out of every 600 dollars invested in the global gambling industry.
Major holdings include Flutter Entertainment ($931 million), Aristocrat Leisure ($378 million), DraftKings ($374 million), and Galaxy Entertainment Group ($342 million). The portfolio spans operations in Australia, Hong Kong, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States, covering casino operators, sportsbook providers, lottery companies, and iGaming suppliers.
Specific investments include Evolution AB ($25.7 million), which supplies live casino games to operators that Norwegian authorities have pursued with DNS blocking. Despite regulatory actions targeting some of Evolution’s customers, the Oil Fund has maintained shares in the company.
Other notable positions include Caesars Entertainment ($79.6 million), Las Vegas Sands ($131.7 million), MGM Resorts International ($59 million), and Wynn Resorts ($106.3 million). The fund also holds stakes in European operators including Playtech and regional casino groups in Macau.
Investment Framework and Ethical Review
The Oil Fund operates independently from political considerations, but the Council on Ethics evaluates whether companies breach the GPFG’s ethical guidelines. While the fund has reduced exposure to online gambling in recent years, certain holdings continue to attract attention.
The Council maintains a list of excluded companies, though no gambling operators currently appear on it. A government-appointed committee is scheduled to redefine the Council’s mandate by October 15, 2026. Several political parties have proposed using the Oil Fund more directly as a policy tool, a discussion likely to intensify during the review process.
In late 2024, the Council on Ethics received a request to assess several industries, including gambling, to determine whether they align with the GPFG’s ethical framework. Recent debate around the Oil Fund has focused primarily on companies linked to geopolitical conflicts and wartime profiteering rather than gambling sector holdings.
Domestic Monopoly Context
Norway’s domestic market operates under strict state control. Norsk Tipping holds the monopoly for online casino games and sports betting, while Norsk Rikstoto controls horse race betting. The Norwegian Gambling Authority enforces the framework through multiple mechanisms designed to limit access to unlicensed international operators.
The regulatory approach has prompted major international operators including Betsson Group, Unibet, Bet365, and ComeOn to exit the Norwegian market in 2024. From January 1, 2025, the Gaming Authority gained authority to request DNS blocking of foreign gambling websites, with a substantial list of domains prepared for blocking.
Policy Implications
The contrast between Norway’s strict domestic gambling stance and its global investment strategy represents a clear policy contradiction. The state’s financial footprint in the gambling industry exceeds $3 billion, or approximately NOK 35 billion, a figure larger than most Norwegians realize.
Whether this contradiction becomes a political issue or remains part of managing one of the world’s largest sovereign wealth funds depends on ongoing policy debates. The absolute investment amount remains substantial despite representing a modest percentage of the fund’s total portfolio.
The GPFG does not invest based on foreign policy objectives, meaning the fund has previously owned shares in companies the Norwegian Gambling Authority actively pursues in the domestic market. This creates a situation where the Norwegian state simultaneously restricts gambling operators at home while profiting from their operations internationally.
Source: iGamingToday
